Comments on: Judiciary Hearing on Gutting Habeas This Morning

By: molly

molly — Tue, 26 Sep 2006 01:03:55 +0000

Leahey always comes through. Didn’t Jon Stewart say to Cornyn he was”the best looking crazy man he ever met?”

By: Nan

Nan — Mon, 25 Sep 2006 20:26:27 +0000

I talked to Sen. Leahy’s committee staffer who doesn’t anticipate the committee will be voting out related legislation before the elections.

Here’s the Senator’s statement from today’s hearing:

http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200609/092506.html

Nan

By: Tim Wayne

Tim Wayne — Mon, 25 Sep 2006 19:49:56 +0000

The right of habeas corpus is our firewall against the tyranny of the majority

Not meaning to be obtuse here, but use of the word “firewall” here is incorrect. A firewall is either a fireproof wall used as a barrier to prevent the spread of fire, OR, it is an umbrella word for any of a number of security schemes that prevent unauthorized users from gaining access to a computer network or that monitor transfers of information to and from the network.

A better word would be, simply, “wall” or some other word meaning “barrier.”

By: Paul

Paul — Mon, 25 Sep 2006 19:01:34 +0000

looseheadprop @ 2

Fitz!

and Fiona

Having watched “baby channel” while watching my friends’ three year old, I get this joke ;)

By: selise

selise — Mon, 25 Sep 2006 16:53:41 +0000

posted a link in the next thread to the mp3 of the hearing….

selise @ 95

Senate Judiciary Committee - September 25, 2006
“Examining Proposals to Limit Guantanamo Detainees’ Access to Habeas Corpus Review”

i had to compress the mp3 and split it into parts 1 & 2… the link to both is here.

By: Rayne

Rayne — Mon, 25 Sep 2006 16:18:05 +0000

Damnitall, I can’t get anybody in Levin’s office.

I want that amendment wording, and I’ll be damned if I have to call Specter’s office.

By: bellumregio

bellumregio — Mon, 25 Sep 2006 16:12:44 +0000

I am so surprise at all this habeas business. It is the canonical abuse of executive power that every political scientist and lawyer interested in constitutional issues should be well aware of. The premise of all of this is that the War on Terror is of such a unique nature that a new system of tribunal- not civilian or military- should be created where the executive defines the rules used to try his prisoners. But the United States has been through every manner of war and the European democracies have faced waves of modern terror without the need to create a judicial process that relies on torture, hearsay and arbitrary justice and the suspension of habeas corpus.

The suspension of habeas is a de facto declaration of martial law. It only occurs when the state is threatened from outside powers or from rebellion, and it is only for a limited period of time. But terrorism, by definition, is no more a threat to the state than are Charles’ “thieves, pirates, and robbers of the sea”.

Everyone can see how the War on Terror- the secret war against an invisible enemy- is indefinite in its scope and its duration. It will last as long as the executive says it will last and it will be fought against any agents he declares a threat. This is Dick Cheney and John Yoo’s unitary executive enthroned.

By: Oilfieldguy

Oilfieldguy — Mon, 25 Sep 2006 15:58:31 +0000

Well, I called Senator Tom Coburns office and said as a constituent of his I want to go on the record that I am opposed to gutting of the habeus protections from the Gitmo detainees and the elimination of any judicial oversight on the Geneva act abuses. The only way we can encourage other countries to embrace freedom is for us to be more American, not less.

By: Christy Hardin Smith

Christy Hardin Smith — Mon, 25 Sep 2006 15:41:27 +0000

Oh, and also, C-Span is required by law to carry the proceedings on the floor of the House or the Senate and any official hearings of either body on C-Span 1 & 2. Unfortunately, the policy committee hearing is a Democratic only one — and thus gets relegated to C-Span3 unless there is no official hearing going on at the time of its scheduling. That’s one of the reasons they started C-Span3, to be able to broadcast stuff like this because it needs coverage. They stream it live from the C-Span website (http://www.c-span.org/), so you can watch and listen from your computer if you have a good enough connection.

By: EvilDrPuma

EvilDrPuma — Mon, 25 Sep 2006 15:38:38 +0000

cleter @ 206

Then, if we have special ops people in Iran now, as Gary Hart indicated, are we “invading” Iran right this minute?

According to Berenson’s standard, we’d have to be. Probably according to my standard too–but I can already see that my standard has some actual thought behind it, and Berenson’s doesn’t. I suspect he’s making this nonsense up as he goes.