Detainees to get the “state-always-wins” system of “justice”

Detainees to get the “state-always-wins” system of “justice”

… what we have here is not an announcement that all terrorism suspects are entitled to real trials in a real American court. Instead, what we have is a multi-tiered justice system, where only certain individuals are entitled to real trials: namely, those whom the Government is convinced ahead of time it can convict. Others for whom conviction is less certain will be accorded lesser due process: put in military commissions, to which most leading Democrats vehemently objected when created under Bush. Presumably, others still — those who the Government believes cannot be convicted in either forum, will simply be held indefinitely with no charges, a power the administration recently announced it intends to preserve based on the same theories used by Bush/Cheney to claim that power.

A system of justice which accords you varying levels of due process based on the certainty that you’ll get just enough to be convicted isn’t a justice system at all. It’s a rigged game of show trials. This is a point I’ve been emphasizing since May, when Obama gave his speech in front of the Constitution at the National Archives and explained how there were five different “categories” of terrorism suspects who would be treated differently based on the category into which they fell: [continued…]

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

One thought on “Detainees to get the “state-always-wins” system of “justice”

  1. Dieter Heymann, Houston, USA

    Please correct me if the following is wrong. It is my view that the Bill of Rights is largely a “Bill of No-No’s” spelling out what our governments (Federal, State, and Local) cannot legally do to persons. It is moreover my opinion that the Bill of Rights does not define which persons are so protected. It certainly does not say “US citizens only”. Lastly it is my opinion that the Bill of Rights does not define where the protection “reigns”. It certainly does not say “Within the USA only”. If these three opinions are correct, then any prisoner held by our Federal, State or Local governments has the unfettered right of habeas corpus, regardless of nationality and regardless of where in the world the prisoner is held captive.

    Yes, I know the caveat of “insurrection or invasion” none of which is operative in the case of the Guantanamo/Baghram prisoners.

    Hey, members of the NRA, if you argue that the Federal Government cannot abridge the right to own firearms for anyone living in the USA, then you must advocate that the Federal Government cannot also deny habeas corpus to anyone living in the USA.

Comments are closed.