Is this the authorization for the death camps and the closing of borders?

[Padme Amidala]

The above title is a question on the front page of patrickhenrythinktank.org

HR 418 is expected to be combined with an appropriations bill to move it through the Senate. This is a very dangerous bill that is now being called PATRIOT III by those who are looking at it.


The following legal analysis at Patrick Henry's web site explains the concern:

http://patrickhenrythinktank.org/hr418-102.html
SEC. 102. WAIVER OF LAWS NECESSARY FOR IMPROVEMENT OF BARRIERS AT BORDERS.

"Section 102(c) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1103 note) is amended to read as follows:

`(c) Waiver-

`(1) IN GENERAL- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall have the authority to waive, and shall waive, all laws such Secretary, in such Secretary's sole discretion, determines necessary to ensure expeditious construction of the barriers and roads under this section.

`(2) NO JUDICIAL REVIEW- Notwithstanding any other provision of law (statutory or nonstatutory), no court shall have jurisdiction--

`(A) to hear any cause or claim arising from any action undertaken, or any decision made, by the Secretary of Homeland Security pursuant to paragraph (1); or

`(B) to order compensatory, declaratory, injunctive, equitable, or any other relief for damage alleged to arise from any such action or decision.'.

"So often lawmakers do not realize the ramifications of their words until years after laws go into effect. The best example is the use of Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution as the number one excuse for federal intervention in non-federal matters that do not seem in any logical way related to commerce. It is common practice to take language out of context and use it to apply to situations that those writing those laws could not even begin to imagine. All too often, the courts go along with this extended construction of the law.

"Section 102 allows the Secretary of Homeland Security to waive “all laws” with “no judicial review” and no remedies. Notice it does not specify property laws or immigration laws. If this section were to be limited to any particular laws, this limitation would have to be written into it. However, there is no limitation specifying which laws may be waived but rather the limitless statement “all laws.” “All laws” includes laws against murder, terrorism, kidnapping, torture, child abuse, false arrest, etc. Therefore the “all laws” necessarily include those related to death camps, the closing of borders and even mass murder.

"The lack of remedies means that if they wipe out all of Los Angeles, the families of those killed are not entitled to re-imbursement and that those wrongfully thrown into camps have no way of freeing themselves.

"The lack of judicial review, while undoubtedly unconstitutional, is likely to be adhered to by timid justices and those in the employ of the Bush and Cheney families. Is this another end run around the Right of Habeas Corpus? The Constitutional Right of Habeas Corpus proved ineffective against Ashcroft. Jose Padilla is still not free and HR 418 was not even in existence when he was placed in detention.

"The result of one barrier and roads project was Auschwitz. HR 418 appears likely to take America in the same direction followed by Germany under Adolph Hitler, when he closed the borders and sent people to the death camps."

[CoffeeCat]

1. Questions about this...

It is alarming that section 102c would allow the Secretary of Homeland Security to waive "all laws". That's absurd and should not be allowed.

However, within the context of 102c, "all laws" can be waived" only in reference to: "to ensure expeditious construction of the barriers and roads under this section."

According to 102c, they can only waive all laws to ensure CONSTRUCTION of said barriers and roads.

So, what do they mean by "barriers and roads"? Could a concentration camp or a holding facility be defined as a "barrier?"

I'm sorry to be so naive, but what "barriers and roads" are they referencing, with respect to illegal immigration? Barriers INSIDE the country, means that people would be blocked from leaving. And roads...roads to what? What does this have to do with illegal immigration? Are they talking about destroying US roads from which many enter the country illegally?

Also, how can it be constitutional for the executive branch to dictate what the judicial branch can/can't do ("No Judicial Review and "no court shall have jurisdiction")? This is extremely troubling. We do still have a Constitution, don't we? Separation of powers...is that still happening?

I apologize for all of the questions.

This is very serious, and worthy of lengthy debate and protest.

[genius]

2. Self-delete. The reply posted twice.

[genius]

3. Under this law, Chertoff has the sole discretion to determine whether

murder and terrorism will help expedite his work. Even if he is wrong, no one can question him - so says the law. Those he puts in the camps may some day cross a barrier or help others to cross a barrier. Death camps would be a precaution within his discretion.

The law is so general that he could blow up the United States to make it so undesirable that people would no want to cross the border. The fact that this is extreme is something that cannot be questioned under HR 418. No one can question whether this is outside the jurisdiction or an extreme act. Only Chertoff can decide that and he has a history of extreme acts that are extremely illegal.