
UPDATE: The hearing has been moved to 10:00 am ET.
The Senate Judiciary Committee has a hearing scheduled this morning, to begin at 10:30 am ET (in Dirksen 226), regarding gutting habeas protections for prisoners under American control. No word as yet on the witness list -- I'm working on finding out who will testify and will update when I do. It doesn't look like C-Span will be covering this hearing this morning (but they will be covering a Senate Democratic Policy Hearing on war planning, which should be a good one -- there are a number of retired generals who will be testifying regarding Donald Rumsfeld's bungling of the war planning and facts that have been hidden from the public -- it will be on C-Span3 beginning at 1:30 pm ET).
We have covered this habeas issue quite a bit -- see here, here, here, here, here, and here for starters -- but I wanted to highlight some backstory on the reasons we have habeas corpus in the first place. You need to know why it is that this is was so important to the Founders of our nation -- and why it ought to be so important to all of us now:
Of all of the legal protections that we hold as American ideals and as examples to other nations as embodied in our Bill of Rights, the right of habeas corpus is the only civil liberty to be held so important by the Founders that it was included in the Constitution itself. This week, the United States Senate voted to restrict that right of petition for grievance.Such restriction was for enemy combatants held outside the United States, so why should any citizen care? Because a restriction on this fundamental right for some could mean restrictions for all of us down the line.
A right to challenge being held by the government for improper reasons is at the heart of our democracy -- where such right was established to secure our rights to liberty and freedom, and to stop imprisonment of opposition candidates for political reasons.
The right of habeas corpus is our firewall against the tyranny of the majority -- it dates back to the Magna Carta, which bound the king to the rule of law. To threaten habeas corpus protections tears at the very fabric of rights in this nation.
Here is why: if you are arrested under false or bogus charges, or without any charge whatsoever as reason for your detainment, you have a right to petition a court to ask that the charges against you be detailed and justified under the laws of this country. The state must justify its right to hold you under the law, or you must be set free -- they cannot hold you without just cause.
What the Senate is asking is that we simply trust that our government is doing the right thing, and that they are only holding guilty persons in our name, and that the military tribunals who have been holding hearings on detainments will adequately address all constitutional problems when many of these detainees have had difficulties in gaining access to legal counsel, and that all of this being done in the name of the United States should be considered acceptable when we afford one standard of justice to our citizens and a completely different standard of justice to those we deem not worthy of it simply because they are non-citizens held in our legal custody.
This is simply wrong. What's worse, there are also proposed provisions in the current torture bill under debate that would strip jurisdiction from federal courts as well. If you want to know why all of this is important -- just read this.
Please take some time this morning to contact the offices of the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee and remind them -- again -- that the habeas provisions are too important to be frittered away. Please, if you live in Pennsylvania or Michigan, take the time to contact Sens. Specter and Levin -- they are going to be key to blocking these abominable provisions.
Here are the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. You can phone toll free through the Capitol switchboard at 888-355-3588 and they will transfer you to the various Senate offices. (UPDATE: Seems there is a problem with the capitol switchboard number this morning. You can find individual Senator and Representative numbers here.) Here is also a list of FAX numbers for each member of the Judiciary Committee, in case you want to call and FAX:
Arlen Specter, Chairman - Pennsylvania - Fax (202) 228-1229Orrin G. Hatch - Utah - Fax (202) 224-6331
Patrick J. Leahy - Vermont - Fax (202) 224-3479
Charles E. Grassley - Iowa - Fax (515) 288-5097
Edward M. Kennedy - Massachusetts - Fax (202) 224-2417
Jon Kyl - Arizona - Fax (202) 224-2207
Joseph R. Biden, Jr. - Delaware - Fax (202) 224-0139
Mike DeWine - Ohio - Fax (202) 224-6519
Herbert Kohl - Wisconsin - Fax (202) 224-9787
Jeff Sessions - Alabama - Fax (202) 224-3149
Dianne Feinstein - California - Fax (202) 228-3954
Lindsey Graham - South Carolina - Fax (864) 250-4322
Russell D. Feingold - Wisconsin - Fax (202) 224-2725
John Cornyn - Texas - Fax (972) 239-2110
Charles E. Schumer - New York - Fax (202) 228-3027
Sam Brownback - Kansas - Fax (202) 228-1265
Richard J. Durbin - Illinois - Fax (202) 228-0400
Tom Coburn - Oklahoma - Fax (202) 224-6008
We may never undo all of the Constitutional damage done by the Bush Administration during the course of our lifetimes -- it may take more than one generation, frankly, to untangle this mess. But we can at least fight to save the pieces of the Constitution that seem to be up for grabs -- and this is one fight well worth having. Thanks so much for all of your efforts on this.
The Democrats on the Judiciary Committee are outnumbered (as you can see from the above list), but the fight is worth having anyway -- despite it being a battle we may lose in the short run. In order to fully win it, we have to have control of both houses of Congress. Let's just think of this as even more incentive to kick some ass in November -- but in the meantime, let's spend some time today reminding the members of Congress that they have to actually DO their jobs in order to keep their jobs.
(The BBC Magazine also did a brief historical review of habeas corpus evolution a while back that I thought might be of interest to some readers. You can read it here.)
UPDATE: Witness list is out:
Rear Admiral John D. Hutson, Ret., President and Dean, Franklin Pierce Law Center, Concord, NH; Thomas P. Sullivan, Partner, Jenner & Block, Chicago, IL; Mr. Bruce Fein, Partner, Fein & Fein, Washington, D.C.; Lieutenant Commander Charles Swift, United States Navy, Judge Advocate General’s Corps, Arlington, VA; Mr. David Rivkin, Partner, Baker & Hostetler LLP, Washington, D.C.; Mr. Bradford Berenson, Partner, Sidley Austin LLP, Washington, D.C.
Only one panel. That's awfully short considering the gravity of the subject matter, don't you think?
Login Here
Share This
Spotlight
Yeah and Specter says he has “problems” with the bill. That gets a great big ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ from me.
Does he just have a pull-ring on his back to say “ihaveaproblemihaveaproblem” before he caves in?
Fitz!
and Fiona
The single most important concept in “modern” history
the backbone of every persons freedom
WTF are they thinking??
Oh, guess I shoulda said “Fitz” huh?
Christy
I don’t know if you are planning a seperate post on this, but i really don’t want to lose sight of the retroactive self pardon for war crimes that bush has in this bill.
It is clearly in response to a memo Alberto Gonzales wrote when he was still WH counsel that warned Bushie that senior WH officials had exposure.
Making it retroactive to the Clinton Admin. is a smokescreen.
dratty @ 3
Nah,
You got there first, you say whatever you want.
I’m just a traditionalist.
The Judiciary Committee is going to discuss changes in the right of habeas corpus?
That’s so piquant of them.
(Who needs one of those “Word A Day” calandars when I’ve got FDL?)
Here’s a banner/bumper sticker I made in May, 2004. Seems particularly relevant today.
Are you kidding me? How come screwing with enumerated Constitutional rights is not some kind of political third rail? Why doesn’t the ghost of James Madison strike them dead for even thinking of crazy crap like this?
Spector is so getting one of those torture postcards.
Josh is suggesting getting in touch with the same folks to urge a release of the NIE that is reported to state that the war in Iraq has made America less secure.
TPM
Have you all see this puff piece in the WashPost this morning:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....00747.html
It seems as though Bush really feels the pain of all the families of service people who have died fighting the War on Terror ™. Can you tell the election is rapidly approaching?
Folks are giving the Post heck in the comment section.
A powerful post again, Christy.
Anyone noticing that the toll free Senate and House numbers are disconnected? Are we that broke as a nation, that we can’t afford to pay our phone bills?
There’s no question that the Habeus issue is absolutely critical to us remaining a nation bound by the law…
However, I’d suggest that while we are in phone banking mode, that we also call every senator we can to tell them that we DEMAND that the full NIE that was reported this weekend be released publicly BEFORE the elections.
So many issues, so little time…
so, I’m calling DiFi’s office this morning… help me think here… point one is on habeus provisions… point 2 is on no review by the courts, 3: (gawd! I need more coffee!), I think of it here in a second.. oh yeah, no retroactive immunity…
I would like to see the Senators introduce a list of “alternative techniques” not allowed… no rape of women or children (who could object to that?) would be a good place to start… and no retroactive immunity for any of the acts on the list… if Georgie Porgie has no idea what outrages on human dignity are, I think we should spell it out for him…
“The power of the Executive to cast a man into prison without formulating any charge known to the law, and particularly to deny him the judgement of his peers, is in the highest degree odious and is the foundation of all totalitarian government whether Nazi or Communist.”
Churchill - November 21, 1943
Will our efforts really do any good ?….I mean…… aren’t they all “in a comma”
just sayin….
Larry
If you can’t get through to your senators on the toll free line and want to call them anyway, here’s a link to DC office numbers (not toll free) for the entire senate.
http://www.senate.gov/general/.....rs_cfm.cfm
C-SPAN has three channels here in Tampa. Surely one of them will cover the hearings.
all righty, time to feed the dogs, hit the showers and then the phones… have a productive day, everyone!
OT — Imus has his sideman Rob in his Bill Clinton persona sitting in with the guest band this morning with a dig at Chris Wallace. The band–Cheap Trick.
Thanks for this post, Christy. If they don’t want to take America’s phone calls, we’ll just spend our phoning time on GOTV.
Hey, Chavez called Bush Satan, now Falwell’s comparing Hillary to Lucifer. Sad commentary on Falwell’s constituency, according to the MSNBC pundit.
In the letters I faxed off yesterday to my senators and congressman, after the bullet points on the bad things in the so-called compromise torture legislation, had this sentence: “Perhaps this can clarify the issue for you: if a bill is more reminiscent of Stalinist Russian than of an American sence of justice and Constitutional government, that bill should be rejected.” I thought this framed the issue well.
(By the way, the bullet points I used were:
*Techniques the world, and our own history, consider torture and that we certainly would condemn if suffered by our own soldiers.
*Convictions based on secret evidence.
*A system of gulags where prisoners may be held indefinitely in a Kafkaesque limbo.
*Further concentration of power in the Executive and further abandonment of the concept of Separation of Powers.
beard5 — saw you weren’t feeling well. Hope it’s just a short day of the ick.
you all notice how McCain is now pushing the 9/11 Iraq connection?
jeez - will these guys never give that up?
ruffian @
3
I think they’re thinking that things would be evah so much easier if we didn’t have these freedoms. A thought from that british documentary (the name escapes me and I’m late for work: about how the powers that be on both sides of this current conflict decided long ago that “individualism” was not a good thing and that conformity was the way to go…the two extremes came to the same conclusion independently. So, perhaps our own extremists are thinking they should be the ones to “decide” and to hell with the rest of us…literally.
Great thread, deep discussion, last night: Arianna Has A Few Words About Big Dog
Just Brilliant Christy. This is one of the most important posts of the last few years (of many critical posts). Thanks so much for honing the complexity of the issue into a “one point” target: Magna Carta/Habeas Corpus. Even the fundies have heard of the Magna Carta. Every fifth grader knows what it is. I can envision a full page NY Times ad emblazoned with a copy of the Magna Carta wording (in old English script) with prominent signatories under the headline “Preserve the Magna Carta.” I can see huge signs similarly titled and held up by citizens in front of city halls around the country. I envisage tens of thousands of 8 x 10 inch “Save the Magna Carta” signs created on brittle browned “parchment”- like paper (actually plain paper “aged” with household lemon juice) being held up by protestors in view of TV cameras and news casters at rallies for Democratic candidates. I anticipate a flood of the same being deluged on congressional offices - and the White House in the next few weeks. I can imagine an ocean of political buttons reading “Save the Magna Carta” pinned on the lapels of all concerned citizens - and politicians - this Fall. Brilliant.
dratty @
4
*grin* It’s a custom, not a law.
OT Larry@16.. Gilliard has a interesting take on the “comma”. It is dog whistle speak to the fundies..”Never put a period where God puts a comma” Bush is evil and insane..a bad combination
(OT–Richmond where in Maine are you. Mini-FLD get-together in Belfast at Darby’s 6pm Tuesday. Hope you can join us.)
The capital switchboard number has been disconnected.
Professor Foland @ 30
curious time - right at the end of the session - for it to be disconnected, doncha think?
Seems there are problems with the switchboard number this morning. I’ve updated the post above, but you can find individual Senator and Representative information here.
Richmond at 26 — I spent the whole weekend trying to come up with a wedge issue on this that could be an effective means of stopping the whole of the legislation, and this is the best that I could do. Here’s hoping it’s enough…
sorry i have not read all the comments yet… but wanted to get this out quick…
the committee hearing time has been moved up to 10AM
i just got off the phone with a very nice person at C-SPAN.. they do not even have a camera scheduled to be in the senate judiciary committee hearing room today. but, i have made the urgent request - by phone, voice mail and 2 emails.
the email addys are:
events@c-span.org
congress@c-span.org
it may not be too late to have c-span broadcast this hearing (i think they were caught unawares by the recent scheduling on an unusual day).
thanks!
p.s. MANY MANY THANKS TO CHRISTY FOR THIS POST
Old Sow - Am back home now - left the Bath area late last night because my daughter has an exam this morning. However, thanks so much for the invitation, I would love to have come. Maine is such a beautiful place, now I have to start working off all the lobster, clams, corn, butter, and blueberry pie!
Also, I believe there is an amendment to add habeas to the bill. Apparently it is the Levin-Specter amendment. Might help the staffer if there’s something quite specific they can put you down for.
After Imus, MSNBC turns into True Crime Magazine, so I switched to CNN. Richard Ben-Veniste is on with Soledad O’Brien. Supports the basis of Clinton’s excoriating of Chris Wallace. Strong urging that people read the 9-1-1 report for themselves and they’ll see that Clinton hits the points right.
Call your Congresscritter’s local office if your Senator’s on the Judiciary Cttee. Or call your friends in their states and ask them to call the local offices. Sorry, BushCo, we will be heard.
carolyn urban @ 12
Sorry, but somehow I don’t think this is about bills that haven’t been paid. Either Dirty tricks or semi-intentional incompetence in my view. Remember folks, government is not SUPPOSED to work.
Richmond @ 26
wow. I wish you were running PR for the Dem Party.
Also, remember that outnumbered though we be, Dems only have to find a little backbone, not a lot. The Congressional session has just a week left. There’s definitely good reason to think that if we make enough noise, this can be stopped. Because on this we don’t have to win, we only have to run out the clock.
Professor Foland @ 37
yes, more here from CCR
Can somebody explain the legal issue here? How can the Senate vote to restrict a Constitutional right? I mean, if the Constitution protects it, then the bill has to be unconstitutional.
The Constitution says: “The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.”
So, what’s the Senate arguing here? That Habeas Corpos never applied to enemy combatants held outside the United States? Or that the because of “public Safety” it doesn’t apply?
Good Morning Gang,
along with phone calls, this is so LTE worthy - most of the public is completely unaware of what McCain and Graham are up to
this wonderful quote via windje above provides a perfect springboard - please dive in
we can not gnash our teeth about public apathy or acquiescence without doing everything we can to inform them of the stakes
A quick report, then back to work.
I just talked to staffers of five judiciary committee members to find out where their bosses stand on the issue of habeas corpus protection for detainees. Here’s what they said:
Specter is opposed to removing habeas corpus from the detainee legislation;
Feinstein hasn’t made a statement;
Levin hasn’t made a statement;
Schumer hasn’t made a statement;
Cornyn stands with Bush (as on everything).
I then told the staffers that I think it’s imperative that we preserve habeas corpus, not just for citizens, but for everyone and to pass my views on to the senators, using some of the arguments in Christy’s post.
I also pointed out that, according to the AP article published last week, the US is holding some 14,000 detaines, including women and children, around the globe — without charge. Of the detainees at Guantanamo, only 10 have actually been charged with a crime.
That actually seemed to get their attention.
Christy, thank you for the post and links.
Professor Foland @
41
I think you’re absolutely right, but “a little backbone” sounds like being “a little pregnant.” Either you’ve got a spine or you don’t, and reports from the XRays taken on the Hill are not encouraging.
Richmond @ 26
Hi Christy, hoping it’s just some bizarre bug over here, as well (headachey, nauseous, and dizzy(like bedspins) treating with advil, and chamomile tea, and crackers)
regarding this save the Magna Carta, I was wondering if this was a good idea or not. I certainly can do medieval looking calligraphy, but would a Senator getting a postcard spend the time needed to read it? The Magna Carta was done in English Bastard Secretary (or near enough) It’s a beautiful script, but not the easiest to read.
No need to apologize Richmond, that was my thought as well. Want to speak to your representative? I don’t think so.
I did get through on toll free numbers that I found in my local phone book. And the toll numbers work too.
OT
cspan2 is showing Dobson and Perkins talking to the powerful and fundie crowd at the the FRC sponsored “Values and 2006 election” thing held this weekend in D.C. right now bashing same sex marriage. It is truly something to behold. It is scary.
“Under the radar” has become the Bush Administration’s standard operating procedure. Steve Clemons is getting signals that a White House plan for keeping Bolton at the UN may be in the works. If true, it would be sprung at tomorrow’s Senate Foreign Relations committee meeting at 2:15 ET, under the agenda line at the end of the agenda “Additional Items may be added.” In Clemons’ view, Lincoln Chafee holds the key to keeping the nomination in committee.
Ever vigilant, firepups!
OT On a previous thread someone was wondering what happened to Socks, the Clinton’s cat. One of my relatives is friends with Betty Currie & I was told that Socks was adopted by Betty.
beard5 @ 47
i believe the original is in Latin.
selise @ 34
I just sent this:
Kennedy is for habeas protections. But you knew that already. Also, his staffer promised to look into the switchboard problem.
I didn’t read all the comments — but that panel is pretty friendly to us. if it was only going to be one panel chosen primarily by Republicans — that was an awfully good set of witnesses.
Habeas is my thing and I have to say that every attempt to completely cut off habeas jurisdiction was met with the Supreme Court reasserting its right to hear all relevant cases — be it through “habeas” procedures or the more ephemeral “all writs doctrine.” But that happened on Rehnquist’s watch and say what you want about him, he was a fierce defender of federal jurisdiction and federal courts prerogative.
Chief Justice Roberts is untested on those issues.
Kafka meet Robin Hood…only in America.
looseheadprop @
5
On the matter of retroactive legalization, last night I posted this. The point being that I don’t get how it will get Bush off the hook. Cruel and inhumane treatment are still viewed as war crimes, and while that may let him off for some things that are humiliating outrages but not “cruel and inhumane,” he and his subordinates still have a lot to answer for. In any case, I hope this ugly, monsterous bill gets tabled until the next congress.
A few people (at other blogs) have suggested that we should focus on the elections and not let the rape-and-torture bill distract us. “If and when we win the elections, we can repeal or pass whatever we want.” But it would take a veto-proof majority in both houses to have that sort of power. If this bill goes through, it’ll be with us at least until Bush leaves office.
email from the ACLU this morning:
WHAT KIND OF NATION ARE WE BECOMING?
Bills being voted on TODAY would redefine torture and legalize warrantless wiretapping. Please call your elected representatives ASAP and urge them to oppose the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (S.3901 and H.R. 6054), and the Cheney-Spector “National Security Surveillance Act (S.2453).
1. The Military Commissions Act of 2006 (S. 3901 and H.R. 6054) would do the following: make the core protections of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions essentially irrelevant and unenforceable; prevent criminal or civil lawsuits from being brought against CIA operatives and other government officials who had used, ordered or supplied the rationale for torture or in other ways violated the Conventions; give the president the authority to declare what is ˆ and what is not a grave breach of the War Crimes Act. The president would have the unilateral authority to declare certain forms of torture and abuse legitimate; allow the president to declare any foreigner anywhere an “illegal enemy combatant” and detain him or her without trial; strip detainees of the right to habeas corpus, including those Guantanamo detainees with pending cases. They would have no ability to challenge their detention or the conditions under which they are being held; permit evidence coerced from prisoners to be presented against them, if a judge found that it was “reliable”; permit detainees to see whatever evidence is presented to juries, but in summarized or redacted form. This could mean, for instance, that the name of an accuser would be blacked out, making it impossible for the detainee to challenge the reliability of the accusations. This has been hailed as a significant “compromise” between the White House and Republican dissidents, but it actually gives the Congressional stamp of approval to abusive interrogations and deprives detainees of human rights and the basic constitutional right of Habeas Corpus.
2. Terrible bills on warrantless surveillance are pending in both the Senate and the House. The Senate Judiciary Committee approved S.2453, the “National Security Surveillance Act,” drafted by Vice-President Cheney and Committee Chair Arlen Spector. The bill: gives the president the option of complying, or not complying, with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and Fourth Amendment protections; rewards the president’s failure to follow federal laws on wiretapping and disclosure by authorizing a broader spying program than the president has admitted to; makes the domestic spying program legal, increasing the government’s statutory power to examine all international conversations and emails and expanding the ability to conduct warrantless physical searches of Americans’ homes.
The Senate Judiciary Committee also approved Senator Mike De Wine’s “Terrorist Surveillance Program Act of 2006 (S.2455. This bill: ratifies the NSA program and weakens the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act; limits disclosures about the program to a small subcommittee and attempts to limit access to this information by other elected federal officials; makes judicial oversight and warrants optional. The bill would allow Americans’ phone calls and emails to be monitored for 45 days without any court oversight, and makes court review after that period optional. punishes whistleblowers who make unauthorized disclosures about the program. They can be sent to prison for 15 years and fined one million dollars.
Please call immediately and ask your Senators and Representative to do everything in their power to block this dangerous legislation. Before Congress legislates, it should have a thorough investigation of what exactly the Administration has been doing with its expanded post 9/11 powers.
OT– Dobson just said that nobody in Congress has come out against what Chavez said except for some pantywaist comments.
Now he conflates Iran and Chavez and is mocking the liberals.
(I guess that is why Rangel and Pelosis spoke up– too bad these folks didn’t hear that)
Dobson: GWB is the most prolife preznit ever and when it comes to the GWOT– he gets it. (big applause)
Perkins : those people only want to sit down to a table strapped with explosives — and the democrats want to talk to them.
Sears: bashes the ACLU.
Dobson: Not all Muslims are violent, There are 1.2 billion Muslims, but a small percentage of a big number is a big number. Millions of people want to kill us.
Now Dobson talking about him and his son killing bears in Canada and tells a dumb story– then says “any of you that don’t like hunting– get over it.”
I brought a parchment copy of the Magna Carta home with me from the gift shop of Salisbury Cathedral where one of 4 original copies resides. I bought it for my husband’s office–he is a law professor.
There are some things in the document that might offend modern readers along the lines of “If anyone who has borrowed a sum of money from Jews dies before the debt has been repaid, his heir shall pay no interest on the debt for so long as he remains under age, irrespective of whom he holds his lands.”
Now it is still a critical piece of our legal history and structure but my husband decided against putting it up in fear that someone would be troubled by those bits.
woo-hooo!!!!
the senate judiciary committee webcast is working today! very unusual - hope it doesn’t crap out on me… i am recording an mp3…
go to this website, and click on the webcast button for the real player stream.
http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearing.cfm?id=2416
live blogging the hearing…
spector thanks everyone for coming on the unusual day…
Read ‘em and weep.
_____
HR 6054
SEC. 6. SATISFACTION OF TREATY OBLIGATIONS.
(b) RIGHTS NOT JUDICIALLY ENFORCEABLE.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—No person in any habeas action or any other action may invoke the Geneva Conventions or any protocols thereto as a source of rights, whether directly or indirectly, for any purpose in any court of the United States or its States or territories.
(2) CONSTRUCTION.—Paragraph (1) may not be construed to affect the obligations of the United States under the Geneva Conventions.
SEC. 8. RETROACTIVE APPLICABILITY.
This Act shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act and shall apply retroactively, including—
(1) to any aspect of the detention, treatment, or trial of any person detained at any time since September 11, 2001; and
(2) (2) to any claim or cause of action pending on or after the date of the enactment of this Act.
S 3929
SEC. 103. AUTHORIZATION FOR MILITARY COMMISSIONS.
(a) IN GENERAL.—The President is authorized to establish military commissions for the trial of alien unlawful enemy combatants engaged in hostilities against the United States for violations of the law of war and other offenses specifically made triable by military commission as provided in chapter 47 of title 10, United States Code, and chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code (as enacted by this Act).
(b) CONSTRUCTION.—The authority in subsection (a) may not be construed to alter or limit the authority of the President under the Constitution and laws of the United States to establish military commissions for areas declared to be under martial law or in occupied territories should circumstances so require.
SEC. 107. TREATY OBLIGATIONS NOT ESTABLISHING GROUNDS FOR CERTAIN CLAIMS.
(a) IN GENERAL.—No person may invoke the Geneva Conventions, or any protocols thereto, in any habeas or civil action or proceeding to which the United States, or a current or former officer, employee, member of the Armed Forces, or other agent of the United States, is a party, as a source of rights in any court of the United States or its States or territories.
(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments 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.
SEC. 108. IMPLEMENTATION OF TREATY OBLIGATIONS.
PROHIBITION ON GRAVE BREACHES.—The provisions of section 2441 of title 18, United States Code, as amended by this section, fully satisfy the obligation under Article 129 of the Third Geneva Convention for the United States to provide effective penal sanctions for grave breaches which are encompassed in common Article 3 in the context of an armed conflict not of an international character. No foreign or international source of law shall supply a basis for a rule of decision in the courts of the United States in interpreting the prohibitions enumerated in subsection (d) of such section 2441.
INTERPRETATION BY THE PRESIDENT.—
(A) As provided by the Constitution and by this section, the President has the authority for the United States to interpret the meaning and application of the Geneva Conventions and to promulgate higher standards and administrative regulations for violations of treaty obligations which are not grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions.
_____
King George the All Powerful.
spector - habeas corpus can only be suspended in times of rebelion or war, which we don’t have now
Jane S. @ 60
and lest we not forget, 86 years after the signing of the Magna Carta, all the Jews were expelled from England.
Leave Chavez to the GOP to bash about. We have other things to do.
leahy up…
wish we could have had more time to prepare for this hearing
hope this hearing will not be “sound and fury signifying nothing”
this time, it’s personal . . .
poured my outrage and frustration about this and torture in to letters to Senator’s Straightalk and Pyle -
already faxed Sen. Straightalk’s, am printing out Christy’s archived post (linked above)and will include it in my fax to Sen. Pyle. imagine, an easy to follow factual and ethical refutation of his abomination is hanging out here for anyone to read
I want them both to know they can fool some of the people some of the time . . .but there are hundreds of thousands of us out here who do know this is no one’s friggin’ compromise , that plenty of us have heard Professor Turley, etc.
no, despite my current fuzzy headed state, I have no illusions about influencing either of these morally deficient bastards - just want them to know they’re not fooling everyone
btw, loved, loved, loved, tweaking Sen. Straightalk about all the love Allen is getting in Virginia and national press and that the shiny Maverick schtick was subject to same in the next 18 mos.
Thank you Selise– got it on now.
Sholom @ 43
Short explanation:
1. Senators, not only Supreme Court justices, take an oath to uphold the Constitution.
2. This means that it is their job, not only the job of the courts, to vote only for bills that are constitutional.
3. However, Senators violate the Constitution by adopting a bill with unconstitutional provisions (like the removal of habeas corpus protections).
4. Then rights are violated for years until a case can make its way up through the courts. Along the way varous courts, staffed with right-wing judges, refuse to interpret the Constitution properly.
5. Eventually the matter gets to the U.S. Supreme Court, where Samuel Alito has replaced Sandra Day O’Connor.
6. Meanwhile, Justice Stevens retires or dies (hasn’t happened yet, but he is the oldest Justice, about 87 now).
7. Bush makes one more appointment before leaving office; Lieberman squeaks through in Connecticut and votes to cut off Senate filibuster against right-wing extremist nominee.
8. Yeah, it was unconstitutional, but the result????
o/t
fyi - Montana Senate Debate on CSPAN3 now - am lovin’ the big guy !
immanentize #55–Would you be willing to give us your best guess on how the current Supreme Court would decide on this, understanding that Roberts is an unknown (although maybe some of his DC circuit court work is a guide?)…
Maybe this is the way this bill will be killed — there are only five days left for these nuts to pass it or go home and save their jobs. They are far more motivated to do the second.
PS LHP if you are still here — re: comments days ago on HW Bush — I totally agree, what I should have said was “not AS evil” rather than “not SO evil.”
xxox
Leahy– “this is unAmerican” and he gets applause.
Demand the release of the April NIE on the increase of terrorism. We the people deserve the truth about this ill-fated war in Iraq, and we must put an end to the cover-ups.
Scheuer just said Clinton completely lied to Chris Wallace about OBL.
leahy - a total of 5 people have been charged under military commissions, and they may charge another 14 more.
what about the other 500?
see page 81 of proposed bill - indefinate detention
“this is unamerican!, this is unamerican!”
{applause from the gallery, spector shuts them down}
Follow Clinton’s lead, read Richard Clarke, Against All Enemies, go to chapter 10, page 227, Before and After September 11, and have a nice day. We were happy with Clinton and we did not known it !
angie @ 69
thank goodness! i suck at live blogging… you go angie!
The Congressional session has just a week left. There’s definitely good reason to think that if we make enough noise, this can be stopped. Because on this we don’t have to win, we only have to run out the clock.
I would make this an explicit talking point. Rushing through an ambiguous bill that goes directly at the founding principles of our country just makes no sense. These issues should be considered in deliberate, open hearings, not dealt with in a bill cobbled together in a back room in the White House.
leahey is doing great!
affects all non-citizens, including those living in the us
… does does not make us safer..
What I simply do not understand is why, if we are supposed to be engaged in a mission to democratize the Middle East, we seem to be systematically eliminating – or significantly eroding – all of the elements that are hallmarks of a democracy.
In this country, all citizens are endowed with the entire panoply of rights, even when some of those citizens may not be the best kind of people. We don’t accord rights so that criminals can go free, but to ensure that the voices of the innocent are not silenced and justice is not denied on the basis of who is or is not in power at a particular time, or what the prevailing sentiment is in the country.
Why are the standards set by our own judicial system, or the international standards set by the Geneva Conventions not sufficient or relevant anymore?
More importantly, why do people not worry that the breaching of the wall between us and them does not increase the chances that someone in power at some point will decide that these are tactics and policies that could work on a domestic level, right here in our own cities and communities?
We know that Bush does not care how the world sees us – he still believes we are viewed in much more positive terms than we actually are. We know he does not see the hypocrisy in our applying one set of standards to our own citizens (for now) and another to those we suspect of terrorist connections, and that hypocritical action only increases the anger directed at us. We know that Bush does not understand that holding to our principles is not the equivalent of being soft on terror or signal weakness. There is strength in principle.
The Judiciary Committee needs to hold the line, hew to the principle and assert the importance of making sure that those democratic principles are present in all of the matters and issues like this. These ideals and principles and rights and privileges are like sand, that can slip through our fingers if we are not vigilant.
Time for these committee members to lose the partisan agenda and vote like the citizens they are. Their votes will tell us a lot about what kind of country they want and see in our future.
leahy-
when the terrorist brought down the twin towers, they did not bring down our constitution and the rule of law
This is going to be the mother of all How Would a Patriot Act weeks for us as these guys try to punch out all their wedge issues for the election. We are going to get blasted with a lot of hard core desperation, so hang on pups! Don’t let a disconnected phone line stop us!
When the terrorists brought down the twin towers, they did not bring down our Constitution.
Brings up the NIE.
We have failed to try a single detainee.
We suddenly have to get this done in a week, when this has been going on for 5 years.
My apologies, re: raising the text of the magna carta. I suspect I wasn’t entirely clear.
Torturing enemies to get a confession and information is a hold over from the worst of the medieval period.
Holding people without reason (habeus corpus) is likewise a holdover from the worst of that period.
My thinking was….send a protest to our representatives in Washington in a form that *looks* medieval, to drive the point home.
My point was to use the hand/script/font of the Magna Carta (but in English, or…if you’re using the current source of my calligraphy Englische.) to further drive home the point.
I suspect my thinking, while typing the earlier comment wasn’t entirely clear. (still might not be)
“Can somebody explain the legal issue here? How can the Senate vote to restrict a Constitutional right? I mean, if the Constitution protects it, then the bill has to be unconstitutional.”
_____
Happens all the time. That’s why we have a Supreme Court. The Constitution (Article III) also gives the Supreme Court the last word on treaties, like, uh, Geneva.
Bush could give a shit. He’s playing for time, to the extent that he even cares.
_
Box Turtle bringing up all the good that they have done so far…
These are enemies of the US captured on the battlefield and are not citizens.
Is there any way to add Senators and Representatives to the Spotlight feature? I honestly think there is more for these people to learn via the posts that go up here than in any phone call or letter or e-mail we could send.
angie - who’s this guy up now?
- claims all the detainees were captured on the battlefield… [what bs, we have all kinds of reports of people being snatched in all kinds of places]
immanentize @ 55
But who would have standing to bring a case to the SCOTUS? If you combine the secret renditions, military tribunals, and suspension of habeus corpus, you get Kafka’s Trial all over again.
Here’s the word to the unlucky folks who would like to challenge such a law from the Administration: We can’t tell you who is being detained, if anyone. We can’t tell you what evidence there is against them, if any. We can’t tell you what techniques, if any, were used to develop that evidence. W