How about the vast majority that are CURRECTLY detained as suspected terrorists-----why does the focus have to be on the small minority of people INCORECTLY detained?
I just love the road this goes down. The implication is that US citizens are denied this right and they are most certainly not by this administration. In fact, this administration has done far less in terms of rights denials then what FDR pulled in WWII...it's not even close. A few great articles on this the last few years.
If a guy gets picked up on the battlefield with an AK-47 and a computer filled with plans to blow up US bases or embassies, well too bad....he's an enemy combatant.
I suggest the following cases be reviewed as refreshers for some....starting with MorOn and Olberman and Matthews.
Ex Parte Quirin, 317 U.S. 1 (1942)
Hirabayashi v. United States, 320 U.S. 81 (1943)
Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 (1944)
Ex Parte Endo, 323 U.S. 283 (1944)
Or I can provide earlier cases from the 1860's during the Civil War or cases later during the Korean War.
Here is the necessary legal language as it applies today.
Military Commissions Act of 2006
“Except as provided in section 1005 of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, no court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider an application for
a writ of habeas corpus filed by or on behalf of an alien detained by the United States who has been
determined by the United States to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant or is awaiting such determination.” §1005(e)(1), 119 Stat. 2742.
No cartoons necessary Marc....learn something first...perhaps even from somewhere other than the sources listed above.
Chunked....you're still a student, why don't you seek out some of the legal experts on campus who can guide you to the reality of the situation.
