Letters to the Editor
chiefpayne
Published Letters: 264 Editor's Choice: 2
-
Well THIS opens up some interesting possibilities
[Read the article: Supreme Court to Bush: You're not above the law]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]So let's see...the suspected terrorists in Guantanamo Bay have the right of habeas corpus.
Ok...now for my questions:
1. Do the suspected terrorists have the OTHER rights of US citizens? What about free speech, the right to bear arms, etc?
2. Do the suspected terrorists have the right to request a change of venue (say in NY city) and requesting bail? Further, does a judge have the right to deny bail, since the people captured if they do not have any histories available for previous lawbreaking?
3. If suspected terrorists have the right of habeas corpus, assuming that the other rights given to US citizens, are illegal aliens to be granted the same rights? If so, then can they then be legally deported?
VERY serious questions concerning this ruling.
-
Ok then
[Read the article: Supreme Court to Bush: You're not above the law]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Easy solution to this - in two parts:
1. Extradite them to Iraq and let the government there do what they will with them.
2. Military will no longer take prisoners...all prisoners will be turned over to the Iraqi military for whatever they choose to do with them.
Now as to whether or not I'm familiar with the ruling, as I understand it the right to habeas corpus is considered to be a "part of the common-law tradition for centuries and was held dear by America's Founding Fathers" - HOWEVER, it is part of the first 10 Amendments to our Constitution.
Now, the question is, DO our protections for our US Citizens cover those who are NOT US citizens? If so, then shouldn't our soldiers be reading Miranda rights? Further, what rights DO people who are not US citizens have? To what extent do we grant them rights as US citizens?
BTW, MY rights as to habeas corpus was never in question as I am a US citizen. The question was, should suspected terrorists who are not US citizens be granted the same rights as US citizens when it comes to habeas corpus...apparently that has been answered by the US Supreme Court. The next question is, what OTHER rights do we grant them.
-
re: again, payne
[Read the article: Supreme Court to Bush: You're not above the law]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]rufus11,
"It's about my rights and yoru rights. that's what the judges are ruling on. the terorrists are beiong used by the republcains as pawns. They liek playing these constitutional games. they like to push the boundires so they can go up to that point without gettign arrested."
That is an illogical assumption as, as far as I've been able to ascertain, they have not tried to remove any US citizen's right to habeas corpus. Seems to me you're reading into this without any specific facts to support that.
"Consitutionality should never had been an issue, as these people should not have ever set foot on cuban (or american soil). but the judges didn't force this. Teh dem's or aclu didn't. Bush did. It never should have gotten this far."
AH but they were not put on American soil...and they were removed from Iraqi soil because at the time there was no place to secure them properly in Iraq...at least no place the real terrorists could not get to them. As I recall, they were place at Gitmo because we didn't want them on American soil for security reasons.
"Again, my right's should never have been threatened in this issue. Bush disagreed. Now the court disagrees with him. Or the law does. The terorirsts "rights" should have never effected my rights. Ever."
But they DIDN'T threathen your rights. You are a US citizen and by Constitutional law, you have all rights therein. The terrorists are NOT US citizens and as such, did not have rights under Constitutional law...until now per interpretation of the Supreme Court.
"you are misunderstandign the ruling and doing what your dittohead masters tell you. But at least know what your talking about before you do yoru masters bidding. Otherwise all that happens is you lose credibility and waste everyone's time."
Why do you consider my concern about the ruling a lack of understanding concerning it? I understand it fine...I am concerned with the future fallout from it.
-
@ delosgatos
[Read the article: Supreme Court to Bush: You're not above the law]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"However, the SC ruled in a separate case, unanimously, that habeus corpus applies to such cases."
As well it should, as he is a US citizen and should be entitled to all rights therein. I find this abhorant and am glad he finally got his trial.
However, this does not change the fact that non-US citizens are being allowed rights that US citizens in our country. I am not sure I agree with this and as such, believe we should just extradite them to Iraq and let their government try and convict them.
This would resolve any issues with habeas corpus and would be a viable compromise for all parties involved, I would assume.