It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Habeas Corpus? Not yours.

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 09:38 PM
link   
Here's for you, some today and yesterday quotes from this good old Gonzalez.


Specter: Now wait a minute, wait a minute. The Constitution says you can't take it away except in the case of invasion or rebellion. Doesn't that mean you have the right of habeas corpus?

Gonzales: I meant by that comment that the Constitution doesn't say that every individual in the United States or every citizen has or is assured the right of habeas corpus. It doesn't say that. It simply says that the right of habeas corpus shall not be suspended.



The Constitution says: The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it. According to Gonzales, the "Constitution doesn't say that every individual in the United States or every citizen has or is assured the right of habeas corpus. It doesn't say that. It simply says that the right of habeas corpus shall not be suspended."

Using that logic, the Constitution also says: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. I guess Gonzales would say "the Constitution doesn't say that every citizen of the U.S. has a right freedom of speech or freedom of religious expression, it just says that Congress can't abridge those rights."

The Constitution says: the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. Gonzales would say that "the Constitution doesn't say that every citizen of the U.S. has a right to keep and bear arms, it just says that the right to bear arms can't be infringed."

The Constitution says: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated . . . Gonzales would say that "the Constitution doesn't say that citizens have the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, it just says the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures can't be violated."

Also:


Gonzales says judges generally should defer to the will of the president and Congress when deciding national security cases. He also raps jurists who "apply an activist philosophy that stretches the law to suit policy preferences."



You have a big, big, big problem just right there. And this guy is the attorney general... So this guy, the attorney GENERAL don't believe in checks and balance, and clearly want to get rid of it and decide in the constitution what should be or not...




posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 10:03 PM
link   
As far as I can tell, and I'm no lawyer, the Constitution doesn't define what a writ of habeas corpus is supposed to look like, or what the suspension of same should look like.

Copies of the language in Lincoln's suspension of H.C. in Maryland, Missouri, and Southern Indiana.

Habeas Corpus is a common law writ; it is codified in custom, and not in the US contitution.

That said, there is a HELL of a lot of jurisprudence in direct opposition to what Gonzales is claiming. Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, and ex parte Milligan, which ruled that habeas corpus can be suspended, but that military courts can only hear cases against US citizens when the civilian courts are closed. If there are civilian courts, they can hear a single habeas plea for citizen prisoners.

As far as non-citizens go, I'm OK with denying them the rights of a citizen. But this crap you've highlighted is beyond troubling. It's ominous.

And the worst part is, this has been going on since the mid nineties, when the "terror exceptions to the constitution" really started. . .


Thanks for pointing this out. Flagged and noted, for Bastille Day.

.



posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 10:09 PM
link   
The constitution and bill of rights expresses what government CAN'T DO, as opposed to what is guarranteed to the people, so under this guy logic, you don't have any right under the constitution... and this guy is the attorney general...



The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.


Big problem America. And yeah, Habeas Corpus can be suspended, but only in cases of rebellion or invasion which is NOT the case.

[edit on 18-1-2007 by Vitchilo]



new topics
 
0

log in

join