SCOTUS to take landmark case

EmperorChrostas the Cruel · Post by **EmperorChrostas the Cruel** » 2004-01-10 01:46pm

http://news.myway.com/top/article/id/37 ... uters.html

This will have long reaching effects on the war on terror, and how it is fought.

I am personaly hoping they will rule in favour of the government, but if not they can kiss a lot of cases goodbye.

Xenophobe3691 · Post by **Xenophobe3691** » 2004-01-10 02:03pm

I hope they rule in favor of the man. I don't care how much of a terrorist he is, he has due process, as well as every right named in the Constitution and those not named.

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2004-01-10 03:06pm

The constitution expressely forbids such detentions. I hope SCOTUS does the right thing and tells the Bush Administration to go fuck themselves.

Frank Hipper · Post by **Frank Hipper** » 2004-01-10 06:21pm

A US citizen is being held as an "Enemy Combatant" and it has to go to the Supreme Court?
Can't people read? The Constitution is pretty unambiguous here.

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2004-01-10 08:13pm

Well, they have to taket to SCOTUS so they can decide if Shrub and Asscroft are allowed to ignore the constitution when they see fit. Something makes me think that the power to use white out on the constitution is not one of its implied powers.

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2004-01-10 08:15pm

Xenophobe3691 wrote:I hope they rule in favor of the man. I don't care how much of a terrorist he is, he has due process, as well as every right named in the Constitution and those not named.

I'm no legal expert, but does Due Process apply to non-US persons?

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2004-01-10 08:18pm

jegs2 wrote:I'm no legal expert, but does Due Process apply to non-US persons?

He's a citizen of the United States.

z020898 · Post by **z020898** » 2004-01-10 09:51pm

Actually American Citizens can be held by the U.S. government as enemy combatants. I reach this conclusion from the fact that if a U.S. citizen was captured on a battlefield in the uniform of America's enemies he would be treated as a POW, not as a traitor. To me this seems logical from the fact that treason is a capital crime and thus to argue that the U.S. can't hold someone as an enemy combatant is to argue that we must try and possibly execute any U.S. citizens serving in the army of an enemy state. To me this would be a much larger violation of the rules of war, and human decency, then holding them as enemy combatants. In addition 100,000s of American Citizens were held by the U.S. government as enemy combatants during the Civil War.

I think that the issue in this case is not the legality of holding a U.S. Citizen as an enemy combatant but rather the process used to declare him an enemy combatant is the right process and rather or not he is an enemy combatant.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2004-01-10 10:27pm

Gil Hamilton wrote:
jegs2 wrote:I'm no legal expert, but does Due Process apply to non-US persons?
He's a citizen of the United States.

I'm a little foggy on the situation, but if he was captured in Afganistan fighting against US forces, he can have his citizenship yanked.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2004-01-11 01:51am

z020898 wrote:Actually American Citizens can be held by the U.S. government as enemy combatants. I reach this conclusion from the fact that if a U.S. citizen was captured on a battlefield in the uniform of America's enemies he would be treated as a POW, not as a traitor. To me this seems logical from the fact that treason is a capital crime and thus to argue that the U.S. can't hold someone as an enemy combatant is to argue that we must try and possibly execute any U.S. citizens serving in the army of an enemy state. To me this would be a much larger violation of the rules of war, and human decency, then holding them as enemy combatants. In addition 100,000s of American Citizens were held by the U.S. government as enemy combatants during the Civil War.

I think that the issue in this case is not the legality of holding a U.S. Citizen as an enemy combatant but rather the process used to declare him an enemy combatant is the right process and rather or not he is an enemy combatant.

Your reasoning is faulty. You assume because they can and have done it, they are entilted to. This man did not renounce his citizenship. The Civil War had people who tried LEAVING the US entirely

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2004-01-11 01:52am

jegs2 wrote:
Xenophobe3691 wrote:I hope they rule in favor of the man. I don't care how much of a terrorist he is, he has due process, as well as every right named in the Constitution and those not named.
I'm no legal expert, but does Due Process apply to non-US persons?

No. The US has decided that non-US citizens have no right to due process. Because of this the US has decided to deport people from one country and send them to another country. They are even denying council from the home country.