fromtheright

pug,

I'm sorry for the delayed response, but you had asked if I agree with the decision.

Yes and no. I think that he should be entitled to a judicial, and not an executive, determination as to whether he is an enemy combatant but should be allowed to be treated as such (held in military confinement, etc.) until that is resolved in due time. Once that is decided, then I agree that he does lose those 5th and 14th Amendment rights. If someone is making war against the U.S. as an enemy combatant on foreign soil, then fry the bastard once his status is resolved.

SLD

This may surprise you FTR, but I too don't have a hard problem with this decision, but for a different a slightly different reason than the 4th Circuit used. What makes Hamdi a US citizen? Surely just being born here of foreign parents who are not citizens who are in fact just visiting here on green cards temporarily doesn't make one a US Citizen? I'm not an international law expert, but I myself was born in West Germany. My father was on active duty assignment in Straubing. I have absolutely no connection or allegiance nor have I ever to the Federal Republic of Germany. I can run for President of the United States just as any other American born stateside (I know you all and FTR will support my candidacy, please make checks out to the "SLD Get Rich Quick Fund" errhh I mean SLD for Prez Fund).

In any event, this Hamdi character was born here, spent his first three months here and then leaves never to return. He's captured in the middle of an armed conflict on foreign soil. He's taken up arms against the United States. He's no US Citizen. He has no more Constitutional rights than any other dickwad terrorist.

OTOH, the 4th Circuit did express serious doubt WRT the case of Padilla. This guy is obviously a US Citizen. He's not arrested on any battlefield. He's arrested here at home. I think the 4th Circuit will hammer the Bush administration on this one and then they will quietly transfer Padilla back to civilian jail where he will then be tried and duly punished - probably life without. In fact, they may not wait to be embarassed by the 4th Circuit ruling but seek some kind of deal with Padilla's defense counsel. We will see.


SLD

faustuz

The US Constitution says so, plain and simple. That’s the way it works in the US. All you need is to be born here. Changing that fact would require an amendment to the Constitution.
The Padilla case is indeed a much more serious issue than Hamdi one, for exactly the reasons you have elucidated. Whatever the courts rule in that case, the fact that the administration wants to deny Padilla due process at all is proof enough that the Bush administration uses the Bill of Rights for toilet paper.

Toto

The harrowing past of a top Bush judicial nominee: Civil rights opposition, commie hunting and a partner who publicly decried "queers, quacks, quirks, political agitators."

SLD

Respectfully Faustuz, I'm not so sure I agree. I looked at the 14th Amendment and indeed it does say as follows: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside." Hamdi was born here, but how, especially at the time of his "arrest" (detention, capture, whatever) was he subject to jurisdiction of the US? I don't believe it was Congress's intent in drafting the 14th Amendment to grant citizenship to the child of every diplomat born here or every visitor who came here without intending to seek citizenship who just happened to be pregnant and couldn't get back home in time. I'd be curious to see more than just this quote. Are there any Supreme Court opinions? Statements by the drafters?

R/ SLD