English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

i took this from another site i posted this on

how do you feel about it, im leaving the argument open...for those of you that dont know what that means here is the definition(sp?) of Habeas Corpus (from wikipedia, im going to choose to post it here for the sake of a debate simply for footing):

In common law countries, habeas corpus, Latin for "you [should] have the body", is the name of a legal instrument or writ by means of which detainees can seek release from unlawful imprisonment. A writ of habeas corpus is a court order addressed to a prison official (or other custodian) ordering that a detainee be brought to the court so it can be determined whether or not that person is imprisoned lawfully and whether or not he or she should be released from custody. The writ of habeas corpus in common law countries is an important instrument for the safeguarding of individual freedom against arbitrary state action.

***more coming soon***

2006-10-10 13:40:51 · 3 answers · asked by Ethernaut 6 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

bacically they've just legalized political prisoners in the USA, and took away the right to appeal if labeled an enemy combatant...

also it seems like its been suspended illegally, in the constitution it says it can only be suspended if we are invaded?

what are your feelings on the suspention of this law?

2006-10-10 13:46:49 · update #1

RDNZL, yes i understand we're at war, but for the great writ to be suspended, it explicitly states the war must be on our ground, and i never tried to hide how i feel about it, yes i am bias

and MEL T, im not talking about POWs, im talking about citizens of the US that now just by being labeled an enemy combatant, they can be kept as a prisoner

2006-10-10 14:28:15 · update #2

3 answers

Nobody likes it. In times of emergency it is sometimes necessary. Art III of the US Constitution expressly permits it in limited circumstances. Abraham Lincoln suspended HC during the Civil War. Many people believe he did so illegally.

2006-10-10 13:50:38 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Actually, the Supreme Court gave the enemy combatants Geneva Protections. This could be interpreted to mean they are POW's. POW's do not have the right to Habeas Corpus.

Sorry. In that case you are just incorrect. US Citizens can be named enemy combatants, but the new Military Commissions Law specifically says they have the right to Habeas Corpus and a regular non-military trial.

2006-10-10 13:48:24 · answer #2 · answered by MEL T 7 · 1 1

Anyone can see how you feel about this, just in the way you asked the question. So obviously you should be able to see how I feel about this by the question that I ask.

Son, do you understand that we are at war?

2006-10-10 13:49:34 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers