Kevin Basil (signature)

Habeas Corpus Protections Not For Everyone

Next article: Priest Stephen on a Southern Fast
Previous article: Warm Light to be Banned in Australia

Written by Basil on 02/21/2007 6:57 AM. Filed under:

Share with your friends and followers:

Guantanamo Detainees Denied Rights to Legal Appeal in Federal Courts- Google News

From the Christian Science Monitor:

“The suspension clause is a limitation on the powers of Congress,” Judge Rogers writes. “It is only by misreading the historical record and ignoring the Supreme Court’s well-considered and binding dictum in Rasul v. Bush” that the court can conclude that it lacks jurisdiction to hear the detainees’ cases.

From the Guardian:

Joshua Colangelo-Bryan, a lawyer representing several of the detainees, said: “The court of appeal has said it is perfectly legal to lock men up for ever without even a hint of due process.

“The conclusion would seem to violate most principles that most Americans believe are fundamental to our country.”

In the ruling, the appeal judges said: “Precedent in this court and the supreme court hold that the constitution does not confer rights on aliens without property or presence within the United States.”

Does the Constitution “confer” rights? Or does it protect them?

What could the Tenth Amendment possibly mean if the Constitution confers rights? To read the Wikipedia article on Amendment X is to read a sad story of the subversion of the Constitution, begun under Lincoln and expanded under Roosevelt.

Share with your friends and followers:


The URL to trackback this post is:

Comments are closed.