9/30/2006

Fighting for Freedom



I just joined the American Civil Liberties Union. Here's why. Republicans sell fear, and the Democrats are paralyzed by it. And so, as the mid-term election draws near, we have a detainee bill that strips away core American freedoms in the name of unlimited executive power - err, I mean, national security. A couple highlights:

Enemy Combatants: A dangerously broad definition of “illegal enemy combatant” in the bill could subject legal residents of the United States, as well as foreign citizens living in their own countries, to summary arrest and indefinite detention with no hope of appeal. The president could give the power to apply this label to anyone he wanted.

Habeas Corpus: Detainees in U.S. military prisons would lose the basic right to challenge their imprisonment. These cases do not clog the courts, nor coddle terrorists. They simply give wrongly imprisoned people a chance to prove their innocence.

I am outraged, and saddened. We've long been heading down a path of eroding what makes our country great, in exchange for unearned trust in our failed executive branch. Now we've crossed into a realm where due process of law has been declared inadequate in the persecution of the enemies we've created. Due process is even withheld from American citizens, if the executive so chooses. No president deserves that level of power, least of all the current one.

We recently had dinner with Lori's Republican parents, both of whom used to work for the Pentagon. They said we should just throw everyone out of Congress and start from scratch. Not a bad idea. I think Thomas Jefferson might agree.

4 Comments:

At 7:36 AM, Blogger Chuck Olsen said...

Obviously, that doesn't mean I'm resigned to sit on the sidelines of our political process. I'm ready to fight the good fight. Democrats are far from perfect, and every candidate should be considered on their merits. But we have a bottom-line obligation to restore the balance of power in government. Glenn Greenwald:

The most important and overriding mandate is to end the one-party rule to which our country has been subjected for the last four years. Achieving that is necessary -- it is an absolute pre-requisite -- to begin to impose some actual limits on the authoritarian behavior and unchecked powers of this administration -- because, right now, there are no such limits.

 
At 12:35 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Once again, Congress has seen fit to legislate without first reading the relevant language of the Constitution. The habeas corpus section of Article I is very clear:

"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."

In the absence of these conditions, Congress lacks the power to suspend the Great Writ, and thus the "habeas corpus" provision of the recent detainee bill is void on its face. The questions from here are:

How long it will take the Supreme Court to find this provision to be unconstitutional? And furthermore ... what are the legal mechanisms by which a test case will make it to the SCOTUS, if no detainee has a right to challenge his detention in court?

 
At 9:51 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"enemies we've created"
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 let me get this straight, according to you 2 knuckle heads We create our own enemies because of they way we live. And 3000 inocent civilians dying on our own soil wouldn't fall under the Invasion of public safety.

Hey Chuck, maybe as a new member of the ACLU you can cover there next big lawsuit against a town of 200 people because of a plaque or statue in there park. Or maybe you can get behind there lawsuites claiming that child molesters and sexual predators are being desciminated against because we don't want them living by our kids.

Scott K.

 
At 10:56 AM, Blogger Chuck Olsen said...

Scott,

You might want to look in the mirror before calling us "knuckleheads." The wrongheaded Iraq war has created more enemies and made us less safe. Did you miss the National Intelligence Estimate reports?

As for the "public safety" exception, that refers to martial law. Fortunately, our cities are not so devoid of public safety that we have to take the extraordinary measure of suspending our rights. This isn't Baghdad.

As for the ACLU, feel free to post links to lawsuits you don't agree with and I'll respond if I have time. Almost all the lawsuits people have problems with come from not understanding a simple concept: We can't pick and choose who gets to excercise fundamental freedoms and liberties. That means people we don't like or agree with have to be protected just as much as you or I.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home