when such an act is prescribed in Article I, Section 9, clause 2 of the Constitution, which states, "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."
Are liberals themselves attempting to undermine the Constitution and should they be hung for treason?
2007-10-11 16:25:14 · 13 answers · asked by mohammadwasafalseprophet 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
undermine the Constitution? did I read that right?
2007-10-11 16:33:28 · answer #1 · answered by Edge Caliber 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well... we aren't being invaded or rebelled against, so habeas corpus should be in full effect.
Also, you wonder why people are so upset? If I go to jail for something I want to have the right to a trial, and not just let the government dictate my wrongs, otherwise they could just do anything they want to.
More to the point, though, I think the recent issue over habeas corpus to which you are referring to is the habeas corpus rights of prisoners at Guantanamo bay. Truth be told, there is nothing in the constitution that states that enemy combatants/aliens have to be given the right of habeas corpus because the constitution only applies to US citizens.
2007-10-11 16:36:49 · answer #2 · answered by marqmike2 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think many Conservatives would be offended by the implication of your questions that only Liberals care about civil liberties. Liberals and Conservatives usually refers to people position on economic issues and the divide on civil liberties is between those who place a high value in individual liberty and those who value personal safety more. Their are a lot of Conservatives including all Libertarians, Dick Army ( former republican leader in the house) and the ghost of Goldwater who also oppose what is going on. Even Bob Barr, who was one of President Clinton's major opponents, is now working for the ACLU because he is so upset about the patriot act.
2007-10-11 19:02:50 · answer #3 · answered by meg 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well... I thought Republicans said "Bush has made it safe"
so safety doesn't require suspension any more...
it's clearly not a rebellion...
and I thought we were attacking them over there so they wouldn't attack us over here? so invasion isn't an issue...
I could MAYBE see a suspension around the time of 9-11, until security was re-established... but I thought Republicans say they have re-established it?
what have they been doing if we haven't even re-established security over the past 6 years?
Do Republicans not believe the tripe they've been feeding the public?
2007-10-11 17:11:11 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No way. it particularly is a terrible. they might arrest a citizen and get in touch with them an alien defense force combatant and you will by no potential have a raffle to teach you're a citizen. So it does word to voters. additionally, it does not droop habeas corpus like the form says for rebel or invasion, it thoroughly gets holiday of it. it particularly is unconstitutional.
2016-11-08 01:44:38 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
READ IT!
Two conditions for the suspension of hebaeus corpus are given:
a) rebellion. That condition does not obtain.
b) invasion. That condition does not pertain.
Therefore, any suspension ofhabaeus corpus is unconstitututional.
2007-10-11 16:54:23 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is NOT a liberal vs conservative issue.
This is an American issue
No such public emergency exists to warrant that.
My questions to you, why are you not concerned and why are you pointing fingers?
===========
Hung for treason? WTF?? You don't even want to go there, because, trust me on this, you'll be next. One way or another, you'll get hung for having an opinion and people will call it treason.
Its time to get your mind off of partisan politics and your head out of the radio. That results in you making silly statements and to lack common sense. Once you do, then you'll stop letting people think for you and you'll be able to do it for yourself.
===========
Peace
Jim
.
2007-10-11 16:32:46 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Well since we are not in a case of either rebellion or invasion any suspension would be unconstitutional.
2007-10-11 16:58:16 · answer #8 · answered by Sageandscholar 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
There is neither a rebellion nor invasion...did YOU read the clause? Ben Franklin said that those who will sacrifice their liberties for the sake of security deserve neither.
2007-10-11 16:30:36 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
You are correct about one thing. Conservatives should be calling fail for Bush's shredding of Bill of Rights. Strange how mellow they get when stuffed with dollars.
2007-10-11 16:36:16 · answer #10 · answered by Mister2-15-2 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋