Courts? Who needs em!

[Rex Kickass]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6111301128.html

 

Immigrants arrested in the United States may be held indefinitely on suspicion of terrorism and may not challenge their imprisonment in civilian courts, the Bush administration argued yesterday, opening a new legal front in the fight over the rights of detainees.

 

In documents filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit in Richmond, the Justice Department said a new anti-terrorism law being used to hold detainees at the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, also applies to foreigners captured and held in the United States.

[kapkomet]

Rex, why should these people have "rights" guaranteed under our constitution, WHEN THEY ARE NOT RESIDENTS OF OUR COUNTRY?!?

 

There are legal ways to get here. Do it right, or don't come at all.

 

(Note: I'm NOT saying that these people should be held "forever", but I am saying that they should not be entitled to s***, because they are illegal and should pay the appropriate consequences.)

[Rex Kickass]

Immigrants, Kap. As in legal residents of the United States but potentially not citizens of this country.

[kapkomet]

Immigrants, as in NOT legal residents of this country, Rex. At least that's how I read it.

[Rex Kickass]

That's great that this is what you see. Unfortunately, it is not what the DOJ is arguing.

 

This specific argument refers to the appeal by Qatari Citizen Ali Saleh Kahlah Al-Marri. He entered the country with his family on September 10, 2001. He was arrested and transported to a naval brig where he has been held under the classfication of "enemy combatant" ever since. He has been denied any kind of legal hearing and has been held indefinitely without charges.

 

Al-Marri was a student at the University who was living in the United States legally.

 

Here's his brief.

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/pdf/al-marriappealbrief.pdf

[southsideirish71]

That's great that this is what you see. Unfortunately, it is not what the DOJ is arguing.

 

This specific argument refers to the appeal by Qatari Citizen Ali Saleh Kahlah Al-Marri. He entered the country with his family on September 10, 2001. He was arrested and transported to a naval brig where he has been held under the classfication of "enemy combatant" ever since. He has been denied any kind of legal hearing and has been held indefinitely without charges.

 

Al-Marri was a student at the University who was living in the United States legally.

 

Here's his brief.

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/pdf/al-marriappealbrief.pdf

 

There were a few guys on flight 93 that were in the US legally as well. They just were innocent foreigners who wanted to be commercial flight pilots.

[Balta1701]

There were a few guys on flight 93 that were in the US legally as well. They just were innocent foreigners who wanted to be commercial flight pilots.

So fine...if you're convinced this guy is guilty of something, bring him up on charges.

[Rex Kickass]

Sort of my point. If there's evidence to be brought against him, bring evidence against him. Or deport him. But I think its a dangerous precedent to subject legal residents of the US to different levels of legal access than citizens are allowed to have.