Hot damn, problem solved! Except no one else is still here.

RichyBassman @ 134

How about “due process for prisoners”

Yeah. Except I’d say “due process for detainees.” To me, “prisoner” connotes an individual already convicted of something.

I looked up prisoner and detainee and agree that “due process for detainees” is better.

How about “due process for prisoners”

Yeah. Except I’d say “due process for detainees.” To me, “prisoner” connotes an individual already convicted of something.

ralphbon at 88 — I think Caroline summed it up as “due process” earlier, and that’s a good, succinct description. Or how about: “what if the government could make you disappear, and you had no right to ask them why?”

How about “due process for prisoners”

I have talked to quite a few people about the loss of this right. Most people’s initial reaction is that this is just a technicality and would not apply to them anyway. This is discouraging to me.

After the MCA passed last year I decided to move to another country. I will still participate in US politics and work to restore our constitutional rights.

Matt at 45

Working for Dodd is a thing to be proud of! :)

Maybe someone from the Dodd campaign would like to write a post here (if the fdl gals would allow) with a list of the Senator’s achievements and votes on (what many consider) important bills.

I still see Edwards, Obama and Dodd as likely candidates, so all we learn about their positions and records is going to be useful.

Cannot the Supreme Court rule that the Patriot Act is unconstitutional? And is the Supreme court disposed to reaffirming habeas corpus?

One of the most dangerous flaws in our legislative system is allowing laws to be created without Constitutional review. Any bad law, and local laws are among the worst, which is on the books but not enforced regularly is dangerous.

A bad law which hasn’t yet been challenged and overturned is still on the books and forces people to self-censure. That’s very bad and is a huge infringement of our basic Freedom.

I’d suggest we add the Judicial branch into our legislative process by requiring every piece of legislation passed by Congress be given an ‘all clear’ by the Court before it ever go to the President.

Having no Habeas protection means having no habeas protection until the Court overturns it. When does that happen? Never if the Executive branch refuses to bring any habeas cases. But, the law remains on the books, just lurking and waiting to be enforced.

Habeus Corpus

If you think I did a crime,
To make me do the time,
You’ve got to charge me by the law
Not just throw me in the pen,
And hold me ‘til I’m moldy.

By the way, I enjoy the site, and find it a refreshing oasis…%>)

As I mentioned in my last post on the subject (three in 24 hours!), the ACLU was invited to post at FireDogLake, and did so this afternoon. The post was titled “A Discussion of Who We Ought to Be”, and that says it in itself, doesn’t…

It seems we’re effectively fighting the Revolutionary War all over again, only this time we’re having to take on our own “elected” Executive and Legislative Branches of government.

To coin a motto:

Know Rights, Know Liberty.
No Rights, No Liberty.

The fundamental guarantee of human liberty in the forming of this nation, of necessity preceded the next steps in the establishment of the civilized society our Founders forged.

Without a sound foundation of liberty, guaranteed for all, the second half of another motto inevitably comes into play in the life of any nation that starts being dragged back toward the tyranny of the Law of the Jungle, where might allegedly makes right – such as Hitler’s ’survival of the fittest’ justification for his brutal slaughter of helpless, unarmed human beings who didn’t meet his approval as “worthy” members of the human race – and where all that signifies (as with today’s Republican Party) is power, for power’s sake alone:

Know Justice, Know Peace.
No Justice, No Peace.

I’ll take liberty, whether it pleases the powers that be or not.