« 2,000 year-old seed from extinct date tree sprouts | Main | Michael Jackson found guilty of butching his face »
June 13, 2005
Supreme Court ignores constitution, sets dangerous precedent
The Supreme Court justices declined to address whether American citizens arrested on U.S. soil can be designated "enemy combatants" and held without trial. By "declining to address" the issue, they implicitly condone it. (That which we don't condemn, we condone). I have a lot of respect for Michelle Malkin and the conservatives, but I'm on the other side of the fence on this one. Jose Padilla, the U.S. citizen charged with planning a dirty bomb radiological attack, has been held as an "enemy combatant" for years. He has never been charged with a crime. This is in clear violation of the U.S. constitution, and is a much greater threat to the citizens of the U.S. than Citizen Padilla ever could hope to be. I saw a bumpersticker shortly after 9/11 that said "They can take our lives, but they can't take our freedom." So, I guess we'll need to collect all those and put out a new expurgated version. Maybe we can just change it to say "America - We bravely traded our freedoms for the illusion of safety."
Update: Mark in Mexico thinks that they wanted to follow protocol and give the appeals court a chance to rule first, but that's not now I read this:
"But justices declined to address a separate issue: whether American citizens arrested on U.S. soil can be designated 'enemy combatants' and held without trial."
Technorati tags:
Delicious tags:
Folksonomy:These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share web pages.
Posted by Peenie Wallie on June 13, 2005 at 01:56 PM
Comments
No, they don't condone anything. This was procedural. The case is in appeal. The Supreme Court will not act until the case comes to them through the appeals system. The attorneys for Padilla had tried to do an end run around the appeals process and SCOTUS said, in effect, "You can't do that. Follow procedure."
Posted by: Mark in Mexico on June 13, 2005 at 02:46 PM
OK, so they told them to get back in line and follow the procedure, while Padilla rots in the brig. I pray that they don't "capture" me and declare me an "illegal combatant", and make me go to the Supreme Court just to decide if I have the right to be charged with a crime. Yikes. He was "captured" in May of 2002, which means he's been in prison over 3 years. If he's guilty of a crime, why not just arrest him and charge him with a crime? What am I missing here?
Posted by: Peenie Wallie on June 13, 2005 at 04:23 PM