Domestic powers of the military...

[Ddrak]

Link

This seems an interesting question to me. Does the military have the power to declare someone inside the US an enemy combatant and hold them indefinitely without access to legal defenses?

Government lawyers told federal judges that the president can send the military into any U.S. neighborhood, capture a citizen and hold him in prison without charge, indefinitely.

That seems at odds with the intent of the constitution and the whole checks and balances thing. If it's true, what prevents the President declaring political rivals as enemy combatants at will, or the entire Supreme Court?

Dd

[Kulaf]

Simple.....he is not a US citizen......he is a US resident. Now you could make arguements that it violates some UN conventions about the treatment of foreign nationals.

My guess is your cited paraphrase was quoted inaccuratly and what they meant was they could go in a grab any foreign national on US soil.

[Embar Angylwrath]

But the lawyers for the administration clearly intend to be able to use the process against US citizens.

"What you assert is the power of the military to seize a person in the United States, including an American citizen, on suspicion of being an enemy combatant?" Judge William B. Traxler asked.

"Yes, your honor," Justice Department lawyer Gregory Garre replied.

It's a blatantly unconstitutional act to deny habeus corpus to a US citizen. You're seeing the fruit of all that anti-terrorism fear-mongering legislation passed a few years back.

[Kulaf]

Why did you leave off the preceding paragraph?

The full appeals court is reviewing that decision and a ruling is expected soon. During arguments last year, government lawyers said the courts should give great deference to the president when the nation is at war.

[Embar Angylwrath]

Becuase it didn't address the intent of the administration to apply the policy to US citizens. You inferred the policy was only intended to be used against foreign nationals within the US, that clearly isn't the case. The administration lawyers are arguing to use it against ANYONE, even an American citizen.

Do you really want the government to have the power to toss your due process rights into the trashcan on a whim?

[Kulaf]

What part of "when the nation is at war" are you failing to grasp? Abe Lincoln, FDR, etc. etc. History is replete with deference to the President during time of war.

If you don't like it......pass a constitutional admendment.

[Embar Angylwrath]

What part of "when the nation is at war" are you failing to grasp? Abe Lincoln, FDR, etc. etc. History is replete with deference to the President during time of war.

If you don't like it......pass a constitutional admendment.

What part of "constitutional right" are you failing to grasp? History is replete with the sacrosanct right of the citizen versus the state. And answer my question... would you have the government suspend your due process rights, on a whim?

[Partha]

Double votes for the mandate FTL.

[Kulaf]

According to court documents citing multiple intelligence sources, al-Marri spent months in al-Qaida training camps during the late 1990s and was schooled in the science of poisons. The summer before al-Marri left for the United States, he allegedly met with Osama bin Laden and Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. The two al-Qaida leaders decided al-Marri would make a perfect sleeper agent and rushed him into the U.S. before Sept. 11, the government says.

A computer specialist, al-Marri was ordered to wreak havoc on the U.S. banking system and serve as a liaison for other al-Qaida operatives entering this country, according to a court document filed by Jeffrey Rapp, a senior member of the Defense Intelligence Agency.

According to Rapp, al-Marri received up to $13,000 for his trip, plus money to buy a laptop, courtesy of Mustafa Ahmad al-Hawsawi, who is suspected of helping finance the Sept. 11 attacks.

.
.
.

The FBI interviewed al-Marri that October and arrested him in December as part of the Sept. 11 investigation. He rarely had been attending classes and was failing in school, the government said.

When investigators looked through his computer files, they found information on industrial chemical suppliers, sermons by bin Laden, how-to guides for making hydrogen cyanide and information about chemicals labeled "immediately dangerous to life or health," according to Rapp's court filing. Phone calls and e-mails linked al-Marri to senior al-Qaida leaders.

If that is a whim, and the country is at war......hell yeah. Toss me in a hole until such time you can put me on trial for treason and kill my sorry ass.

That answer your question?

[Partha]

Bullshit.

They could give Al-Marri a trial now if this evidence is so ironclad.

They won't, though. They want to stick him in said hole with no lawyer, none of the Constitutional protections granted at our founding, on the President's word.

The same government that told you that Saddam had WMD and we knew where it was, that told you that Saddam had operational ties to Al-Qaeda, that Jose Padilla (ANOTHER American imprisioned without his Constitutional protections) was a dirty bomber and they had proof of THAT, too....

Well, at least Kulaf is consistent. He keeps swallowing the bullshit without complaint. Embar is too erratic; he may be developing his tender concience now that we're on the threshold of President Barry Hussein X Obama gaining this exact same power.

[Kulaf]

Yeah......THAT'S why they issolate these guys without trial.....because there isn't enough evidence to convict them.

[Embar Angylwrath]

Partha - I've always been consistant about the protection of freedoms enjoyed by US citizens.

Kulaf - The FBI says a lot of things, and they've been known to be wrong a a number of occasions. Without access to due process, how would a citizen challenge the charges made against him or her?

[Kulaf]

What would you do with them Embar?

[Partha]

Partha - I've always been consistant about the protection of freedoms enjoyed by US citizens.

I repeat: Bullshit. You were incredibly silent (and remain so) about Jose Padilla's case.

[Kulaf]

What's to be silent about? He was convicted by a jury and sentenced to 17 years in federal prison.

[Rsak]

If the person is a US citizen then it is treason and there is a system for that. If they are not a US citizen then it is terrorism.

In both cases if there is evidence of linking to a foreign national government or a multinational organization then in war time the military should have jurisdiction over the suspect to gather operational intelligence. The FBI/CIA should have access as well for their area of responsibility and their expertise on that subject or suspect. Once the war has ended or the military is done with the suspect then the FBI/CIA will have control as they move towards a legal resolution either in a criminal court or a war crimes court depending on their citizenship status.

[Ddrak]

Some facts:

i) The 4th amendment has been universally held to apply to resident aliens as well as citizens. Refer Landon v. Plasencia, 459 U.S. 21, 32-4 ('82); Benitez-Mendez v. INS, 760 F.2d 907, 09-10 (9th Cir.'85); INS v. Delgado, 466 U.S. 210, 213 n.1, 215-21 ('84); Martinez v. Nygaard, 831 F.2d 822, 824, 826-28 (9th Cir.'87). The exact wording of the court is:

[The people] refers to a class of persons who are part of a national community or who have otherwise developed sufficient connection with [the United States] to be considered part of that community.''

ii) "Wartime" is somewhat vague as a proposition, especially as it isn't clearly mentioned in the constitution as an excuse to suspend the bill of rights. This is particularly true given the US has been at war almost continuously for the last century. However, there is some indication that the USSC is willing to give the executive some degree of latitude when it comes to national security though they are prepared to draw the line at blatant constitutional violations.

iii) In this specific case the government lawyer (possibly on his own and not under direction) specifically stated that he wanted to claim the 4th amendment had no holding over someone accused (not convicted) of "terrorism" whether they were a citizen or not. That's a pretty interesting statement.

iv) Posse Comitatus provides a certain barrier for the military to be used in domestic cases.

Dd

[Klast Brell]

I can only hope that a Democratic administration will reverse these disastrous Bush policies and begin to repair the damage that has been done to our country's reputation on the world stage.

[Rsak]

Actually all a democratic administration will do is make different errors that foreign countries will use to further weaken the supposed "reputation" of the US.

So much for carrying a big stick like the old days and letting the opinionated ninnies think what ever they want.

[Embar Angylwrath]

What would you do with them Embar?

I'd allow them access to due process, which involves access to an attorney, and a right to a speedy trial. I would, however, be ok with a closed trial, as long as the adjudication process was neutral.