Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Somebody please explain to me if U.S. CITIZENS can be detained w/no habeus corpus under the MCA

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
The Cleaner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-31-07 11:58 AM
Original message
Somebody please explain to me if U.S. CITIZENS can be detained w/no habeus corpus under the MCA
I previously thought U.S. citizens could be deemed enemy combants, scooped up by Homeland Security, then provided no habeus corpus rights care of the Military Commissions Act (MCA).

But Wikipedia says otherwise:


On 29 September 2006, the House and Senate approved the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA), a bill that would suspend habeas corpus for any alien determined to be an “unlawful enemy combatant engaged in hostilities or having supported hostilities against the United States”<2><3> by a vote of 65-34. (This was the result on the bill to approve the military trials for detainees; an amendment to remove the suspension of habeas corpus failed 48-51.<4>) President Bush signed the Military Commissions Act of 2006 into law on October 17, 2006.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_corpus


So question #1: Does Bush still have the authority to call an American citizen an "enemy combatant"?
And #2: Does habeus corpus still apply to American citizens, or has it been abolished for foreigners only?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Bluerthanblue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-31-07 12:01 PM
Response to Original message
1. Jose Padilla is not an "alien"- though
I doubt he could tell you that now that we've gotten through with him-

I think wicki is wrong on this-

We are all vulnerable.

great democracy eh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-31-07 12:03 PM
Response to Original message
2. Leahy has said that, as passed, EVERYBODY is vulnerable...
In this arena, I trust Leahy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
adigal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-31-07 12:07 PM
Response to Original message
3. It is abolished for all enemy combatants and guess who decides
who is an enemy combatant??? Bingo!!! GWB!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Drum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-31-07 12:09 PM
Response to Original message
4. See also: John Walker Lindh, one of the original test-cases for BushCo.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Walker_Lindh

Yes, Lindh's case is way out on one side of the issue, but I seem to recall that even a few years ago his status as American didn't help him out in the least.

And under the MCA, I don't think citizenship matters...whoever you are, worldwide, it sounds as if you can be picked up and held/tortured/imprisoned just on W's say-so, and no one has the right to address the evidence against them.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-31-07 12:11 PM
Response to Original message
5. As everyone know, terrorists aren't citizens. They're evil. And Bush will do what he's gotta do.
He's sworn to protect this country, see. And that's hard work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Norquist Nemesis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-31-07 12:11 PM
Response to Original message
6. Not sure, but I think court ruled one can be stripped of citizenship
thus paving the way to be under the terms of "alien" enemy combatant. Could be wrong on that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Crabby Appleton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-31-07 12:14 PM
Response to Original message
7. Aliens only S.3930 Section 7

Aliens only - below is Section 7 of

SEC. 7. HABEAS CORPUS MATTERS.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 2241 of title 28, United States Code,
is amended by striking both the subsection (e) added by section
S. 3930—37
1005(e)(1) of Public Law 109–148 (119 Stat. 2742) and the subsection
(e) added by added by section 1405(e)(1) of Public Law
109–163 (119 Stat. 3477) and inserting the following new subsection
(e):
‘‘(e)(1) No court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to
hear or consider an application for a writ of habeas corpus filed
by or on behalf of an alien detained by the United States who
has been determined by the United States to have been properly
detained as an enemy combatant or is awaiting such determination.
‘‘(2) Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and (3) of section
1005(e) of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 (10 U.S.C. 801
note), no court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear
or consider any other action against the United States or its agents
relating to any aspect of the detention, transfer, treatment, trial,
or conditions of confinement of an alien who is or was detained
by the United States and has been determined by the United
States to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant
or is awaiting such determination.’’.
(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act, and
shall apply to all cases, without exception, pending on or after
the date of the enactment of this Act which relate to any aspect
of the detention, transfer, treatment, trial, or conditions of detention
of an alien detained by the United States since September 11,
2001.

page 37 at the following link for the MCA:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:s3930enr.txt.pdf

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-31-07 12:17 PM
Response to Original message
8. A simple question.
Even if MCA did not shatter, shread, render useless, tear, fold mutlilate, cut, spindle, crush, demolish, erode, corrode, bathe in acid, incinerate, exterminate, erase, smash, evicerate, or eliminate our constitutional rights,

DO YOU THINK FOR ONE SHAKE OF A LAMB'S TAIL THAT THAT WOULD STOP THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION EVEN FOR A MOMENT?

sorry about shouting. Had a minor run in with a TSA asshole and it still burns my ass that our country is slowly turning into a armed concentration camp.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-31-07 12:51 PM
Response to Original message
9. * determines who is an enemy combatant... n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Sep 07th 2024, 08:27 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC