Presidential candidates with no understanding of the Constitution
From the National Review:
Crane asked if Romney believed the president should have the authority to arrest U.S. citizens with no review. Romney said he would want to hear the pros and cons from smart lawyers before he made up his mind. Crane said that he had asked Giuliani the same question a few weeks ago. The mayor said that he would want to use this authority infrequently.
6 comments:
Vague. Flesh out the context a bit. You can't claim a sensational headline such as the above without context. I mean, I can't see a President personally slapping handcuffs on anyone.
Jose Padilla.
I'm not sure that's a fair example. Padilla broke a lot of new legal ground, some of which is still being worked out.
At first, he was plotting to detonate a dirty bomb in DC.
Then he was plotting to blow up an apartment complex somewhere else.
Then he was just too dangerous to have in civilian custody.
Then he was put in civilian custody, and charged with "providing material support to terrorists".
Explain to me how that justifies keeping an American citizen in jail without any of his Constitutional rights for 5 years.
I go back to what I said before - Padilla breaks a lot of murky legal ground. I would imagine that the Feds thought that the prudent course of action would be to sequester him and take the harshest approach so as not to establish a weak precedent for the future.
It may have been prudent, but the supreme law of the land says "It don't work 'ike 'at, de-ah". You can't ignore the Constitution just because it's inconvenient...
Post a Comment