DEMOCRATS INTRODUCE LEGISLATION TO RESTORE HABEAS CORPUS

[kpete]

HARMAN, NADLER INTRODUCE LEGISLATION TO
RESTORE HABEAS CORPUS
No reason why we can’t fight the War on Terror and live up to our obligations under US law and the Geneva Conventions


WASHINGTON D.C. -- Congresswoman Jane Harman (D-Venice), Chair of the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Intelligence, and Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Chair of the Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, today announced the introduction of two bills that would address and reverse problematic parts of the Military Commissions Act.

Both the “Restoring the Constitution Act” and the “Habeas Corpus Restoration Act” will bring credibility to the process of detaining terrorist suspects by placing it within a legal framework. This includes: restoring habeas corpus, narrowing the definition of “unlawful enemy combatant” as defined in the Military Commissions Act, prohibiting evidence obtained under coercion, and affirming the Geneva Conventions. Congresswoman Harman’s statement follows below:

The Administration has never completely found its way out of the “fog of law” that set in after September 11. No one questions that September 11 and the threat of future attacks required a swift, decisive, and forceful response. Many Members – me included – offered to help the Administration create a legal framework to guide this response, setting the ground rules for detaining, interrogating, and eventually trying terrorism suspects.

We had an opportunity to show the world that the United States could fight those who would do us harm and protect our core values. That we could be both strong and just.

We missed this opportunity. The Administration chose to act unilaterally, claiming for itself the right to ignore long-standing US and international law regarding the treatment of detainees. And in the process, the United States has paid a steep price in eroded moral authority.

read the rest at:
http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/ca36_harman/March_8.html

[solara]

1. k&r BIG TIME

[no_hypocrisy]

2. Let the bastard try to veto this Bill and let his lackeys in the House and

Senate vote against it. This time, the public WILL remember for longer than 3 minutes.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

28. I agree. To veto would be an overt act of tyranny, for sure.

*shakes head* Am I really living in the U.S.A.? It doesn't feel like it, anymore.

[JackBeck]

3. What a coinkydink.

On my train ride to work this morning I was reading an article about when Andrew Jackson suspended Habeas Corpus and declared martial law in New Orleans.

[aquart]

4. Just tell me who votes against it.

i'm still dealing with the shock of LOSING habeas corpus in America.

[porphyrian]

5. Yeah, that's good. - n/t

[redqueen]

6. This should be interesting!

Let's see who votes against it, and why.

[Richard Steele]

7. K&R

[CrazyOrangeCat]

8. kick

so the Magna Carta might still be relevant after all?:sarcasm:

[Kelly Rupert]

9. K&R for Democratic spine!

[bonito]

10. K&R n/t

[dkofos]

11. What about the rest of the UNCONSTITUTIONAL patriot act

[loudsue]

22. THAT is the question we should be asking!

Why in the HELL would the so called "Dems" leave the rest of the Patriot Act in force? The whole Act is nothing but a blueprint for fascism.

Washington must have something in the water....


:kick::kick::kick:

[ananda]

29. .. and fascist spores in the air.

Washington congresscritters are so polluted with corruption
and stagnation of the lungs that I don't know whether they
can ever be cured.

At least a few are relatively healthy.. meaning still a bit
human.

[mconvente]

12. K&R! VERY IMPORTANT!!

Kudos to my senators Menendez and Lautenberg for taking the lead on this important issue in the Senate.

[MasonJar]

13. What! The habeas corpus doctrine of that little ole thing, the Magna

Carter(W's spelling, not mine,) must be at least as "quaint" as the Geneva Convention. Personally I am into "QUAINT." I do NOT like the so-called REALITY created by the Bushistas.

[Old and In the Way]

14. Is it me or have the Democrats started a 6 front war?

They seem to be moving on to a lot of fronts today. The WH lawyers are going to need reinforcements. The people are storming the castle!

[magellan]

15. I was going to say the same thing

It was shocking to come onto DU this evening and see all that's happened today -- an extremely pleasant surprise! I don't mind one bit being proved wrong about the Dems in this manner. And I like the 6 front war analogy; that's how BushCo keep everybody off balance so the best response is to fight fire with fire!!

Notice too that the Dems appear to have waited till Bush** left on his Latin America tour to open the floodgates. I'm loving it!!

I'm finally starting to feel some hope for this country, and it's a good feeling. :)

[Solly Mack]

16. Will this also allow for the War Crimes Act of 1996 to revert back to

its original language? The MCA 2006 changed the wording of 1996 ACT, iirc. Also, the retro clause that went back to 1997 for immunity for violations, will that also be changed?

The impact of the Military Commissions Act of 2006
http://www.cpa.org.au/garchve06/1300case.html
The Military Commissions Act was signed by President Bush on October 17, 2006, and it protects US officials and military personnel by: 1) narrowing the grounds of criminal liability under the War Crimes Act and making those revisions retroactive to November 26, 1997; and by 2) retroactively extending a defence for criminal prosecutions related to detentions and interrogations back to September 11, 2001.

These immunising provisions essentially grant an amnesty for international crimes including war crimes and torture. The retroactivity provision directs that prosecutions of war crimes committed since 1997 will fall under the new narrowed range of standards and interpretations of war crimes, which would protect civilians from being prosecuted for committing acts that would have been considered war crimes under the old definition — thereby explicitly aiming at immunising American officials and others from prosecution in their country.



http://www.aclu.org/natsec/gen/26861leg20060925.html


Moreover, by revamping the War Crimes Act and retroactively applying the new provisions, S. 3930 replaces a provision criminalizing “grave breaches” of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions with a list of violations that is less inclusive and less certain than current law. For example, subsection 8(b) of S. 3930 will give the Executive Branch and its prosecutors discretion to answer new questions such as:

- whether the “serious physical or mental pain or suffering” is different than “severe,”

- whether “cuts, abrasions, or bruises” can be the basis for a crime when they appear to be specifically excluded from the list of “serious physical pain or suffering,”

- whether the requirement of “bodily injury” in the definition of “serious physical pain or suffering” means that waterboarding cannot be “serious physical pain or suffering,” and

- whether the bill’s prohibition against “serious and non-transitory mental harm (which need not be prolonged)” bars prosecutions for brief use of waterboarding or mock executions.

Administration officials--instead of Congress--will be the ones specifying which acts fall within each of these new terms.

[sonias]

17. Wow fitzmas and this all in one week

I love it!
:bounce::bounce::bounce:

Sonia

[Greeby]

18. Why is everyone getting so eaten up about the MCA?

Bush already did - and will still do - all the things permitted in the Act, whether they are legal or illegal, he doesn't give a shit

[lonestarnot]

19. WWWWWWooooodamnwhooo!

:applause:

[La_Fourmi_Rouge]

20. Go Jerry and Jane!

IT'S ABOUT TIME!

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. Slowly reversting the bush machine

GOOD

Now wanna bet the king will either veto or sing this with a fucking signing statement

[Mind_your_head]

23. K & R - Morning kick

:kick:

[yellerpup]

24. Good news on top of more good news!

K&R! :kick: :kick: :kick:

[The Stranger]

25. There is no such thing as an "unlawful enemy combatant." The Geneva Conventions create a privilege

for combatants and defines when that privilege applies. If one is not a combatant under the privilege, one is simply a criminal, subject to prosecution by due process.

The "unlawful enemy combatant" was a fraudulent construction created by the Neonazicons to avoid due process and the inalienable rights of every human being.

[spanone]

26. This is a sad state of affairs when Congress has to try to reinstate our RIGHTS.

[Strawman]

27. And when Bush vetoes it and they can't override it

Those Democrats who failed to vote against or filibuster against this the last time (like my Senator, Stabenow) will want credit I suppose. Whatever.

[gollygee]

30. YAY !!!

:D