Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Robert Parry: Gitmo 'Justice' for US Citizens?

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 » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-21-08 08:50 AM
Original message
Robert Parry: Gitmo 'Justice' for US Citizens?
Gitmo 'Justice' for US Citizens?

By Robert Parry
July 21, 2008

A conservative-dominated U.S. Appeals Court has opened the door for President George W. Bush or a successor to throw American citizens – as well as non-citizens – into a legal black hole by designating them “enemy combatants,” even if they have engaged in no violent act and are living on U.S. soil.

The federal Appeals Court in Richmond, Virginia, ruled 5-4 on July 15 that Bush had the right, while prosecuting the “war on terror,” to hold Qatari citizen (and Peoria, Illinois, resident) Ali al-Marri indefinitely as an “enemy combatant.”

But some of the court’s more liberal judges expressed alarm, saying the legal reasoning that denied al-Marri meaningful due process – not only trampled on American legal traditions but could be used to lock up U.S. citizens as well.

“For over two centuries of growth and struggle, peace and war, the Constitution has secured our freedom through the guarantee that, in the United States, no one will be deprived of liberty without due process of law,” wrote Judge Diana Motz, a Bill Clinton appointee, who dissented against the court’s approval of sweeping presidential powers.

Motz noted that al-Marri has been imprisoned for more than five years, “without acknowledgement of the protection afforded by the Constitution, solely because the Executive believes that his indefinite military detention – or even the indefinite military detention of a similarly situated American citizen – is proper.”

Al-Marri’s lawyers plan to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, and the case underscores one of the biggest issues at stake in the November elections: whether Republican John McCain will get to fulfill his promise to appoint more Supreme Court judges like Samuel Alito and John Roberts, who have embraced Bush’s vision of an all-powerful President.

more...

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2008/072108.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bbgrunt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-21-08 10:42 AM
Response to Original message
1. k n r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hydra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-21-08 10:44 AM
Response to Original message
2. Slowly boiling frog n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
barbtries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-21-08 11:33 AM
Response to Original message
3. of the five,
how many were appointed by bush?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cosmicdot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-21-08 04:39 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Bu$hJr, Poppy and Reagan have the most appointments
I found this article which mentions justice's names http://freeinternetpress.com/story.php?sid=17602
in the case.

The article mentions that "(t)he Fourth Circuit is generally considered the nation’s most conservative federal appeals court. The closely divided and complex decision in a major terrorism case therefore came as something of a surprise."

It, also, says, "All of the judges who would have denied Marri any relief were appointed by Republican presidents, and all who would have granted him complete relief were appointed by Democrats. Judge Traxler was appointed to the appeals court by President Bill Clinton."

Wiki has a list of who currently sets on the Appeals Court in Richmond and who appointed them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Fourth_Circuit#Current_composition_of_the_court


Whether appointed by either Poppy, Dimson Bu$h or Reagan, any GOP appointees made from 1981 forward most likely were groomed and vetted by Ed Meese and the Federalist Society.

Brief bios and the name of who did the appointing can be found at this link http://www.fjc.gov/.

One could always go to the senate.gov website to see which Senators voted to confirm the appointments. Generally, they usually find no opposition.


The five judges who ruled that the president has the authority to detain people captured in the United States offered differing criteria for who might be subject to such detention. In earlier decisions, the Supreme Court and the Fourth Circuit had ruled that the 2001 Congressional authorization allowed the military detention of people like Yaser Hamdi and Jose Padilla, American citizens who had been present in the combat zone in Afghanistan.

Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III said the president may also detain members of organizations or nations against which Congress has authorized the use of force who mean to harm people or property to further military goals.


Wilkinson, James Harvie III

Born 1944 in New York, NY

Federal Judicial Service:
Judge, U. S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Nominated by Ronald Reagan on January 30, 1984, to a seat vacated by John Decker Butzner, Jr.; Confirmed by the Senate on August 9, 1984, and received commission on August 13, 1984. Served as chief judge, 1996-2003.


Judge Diana Gribbon Motz, writing for herself and three other judges, disagreed, saying that Marri was at most a civilian criminal who may be prosecuted in the courts but not detained by the executive branch.

“This does not mean that al Marri, or similarly situated American citizens, would have to be freed,” Judge Motz wrote. “Like others accused of terrorist activity in this country, from the Oklahoma City bombers to the convicted September 11th conspirator” - Zacarias Moussaoui - “they could be tried on criminal charges and, if convicted, punished severely. But the government would not be able to subject them to indefinite military detention.”

Judge William B. Traxler, Jr., was the swing vote. He agreed that Marri was subject to detention if what the government said about him was true; but Judge Traxler broke with the judges who voted against Marri across the board. Those judges said Marri had already had an adequate opportunity to challenge his detention in court, in the proceeding based on Rapp’s statement. Judge Traxler said that Marri must be given a fair and meaningful opportunity to see and refute “the most reliable evidence” against him, subject to national security and other concerns.



Motz, Diana Jane Gribbon

Born 1943 in Washington, DC

Federal Judicial Service:
Judge, U. S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Nominated by William J. Clinton on January 27, 1994, to a new seat created by 104 Stat. 5089; Confirmed by the Senate on June 15, 1994, and received commission on June 16, 1994.


Traxler, William Byrd Jr.

Born 1948 in Greenville, SC

Federal Judicial Service:
Judge, U. S. District Court, District of South Carolina
Nominated by George H.W. Bush on November 14, 1991, to a seat vacated by Clyde H. Hamilton; Confirmed by the Senate on February 27, 1992, and received commission on March 2, 1992. Service terminated on October 21, 1998, due to appointment to another judicial position.

Judge, U. S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Nominated by William J. Clinton on July 10, 1998, to a seat vacated by Donald Stuart Russell; Confirmed by the Senate on September 28, 1998, and received commission on October 1, 1998.







Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
barbtries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-21-08 06:32 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. thank you
i had a feeling.
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 Tue Apr 30th 2024, 06:01 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles 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