American Senate fails on Habeas Corpus

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
The Nation Wed Sep 19, 2:23 PM ET

The Nation-- Today the US Senate fell four votes short of restoring Habeas Corpus, the fundamental constitutional right of individuals to challenge government detention, which the Republican Congress revoked in last year's Military Commissions Act. Fifty-six senators supported a procedural move to tie the Habeas provision to legislation authorizing defense spending--a step that requires sixty votes.

The amendment was sponsored by Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, Senator Arlen Specter, who voted for the legislation that the amendment attempts to reverse, and Senator Chris Dodd, who blasted today's vote. "Each of us in the Senate faced a decision either to cast a vote in favor of helping to restore America's reputation in the world, or to help dig deeper the hole of utter disrespect for the rule of law that the Bush Administration has created. Unfortunately, too many of my colleagues chose the latter," he said.

Backers of the amendment and human rights organizers say they will continue to press for habeas restoration. Leah Adler, an organizer with Working Assets, wrote today that activists should focus on the U.S. House, which will "likely consider legislation to restore habeas corpus in the next few weeks."

Today's vote also suggests a new Senate majority for Habeas Corpus. (Last Congress, a similar amendment did not even break 50 votes.) And yes, it is a sad sign that we are reduced to counting votes for which members of Congress are upholding their oath to support the Constitution.
 

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
I would have thought this would have received more attention. Damn democrats playing funny business with Habeas corpus. Attaching the bill to defense spending...get serious...
 

I think not

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 12, 2005
10,506
33
48
The Evil Empire
Habeas Corpus never existed when you're a prisoner of war to begin with. That's where this applies.

When was the last time a prisoner of war sought relief from detention and was granted?
 

Unforgiven

Force majeure
May 28, 2007
6,770
137
63
Habeas Corpus never existed when you're a prisoner of war to begin with. That's where this applies.

When was the last time a prisoner of war sought relief from detention and was granted?

I think it has more to do with those arrested under the guise of national security more than it does for any prisoner of war held by the US. No trial, no charges, no lawyers, all the evidence they need they say they have they just can't show it to anyone.
 

eh1eh

Blah Blah Blah
Aug 31, 2006
10,749
103
48
Under a Lone Palm
Habeas Corpus never existed when you're a prisoner of war to begin with. That's where this applies.

When was the last time a prisoner of war sought relief from detention and was granted?

I tend to think that war has not really been declared. So can these people be prisoners of war if, technially speaking, there is no war.
 

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
"Illegal enemy combatants" is a vague term. There is operation enduring freedom and operation Iraqi freedom, but no formal declaration of war. Can drug dealers be held through the equally vague war on drugs as illegal enemy combatants?


Restoring habeas corpus would go along way towards mending some of the animosity, and mending the hypocrisy.