Tim May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote : > >First, even non-citizens have court rights now being denied to the >concentration camp detainees. (Many of you reading this list are > ><snip> > >The Supreme Court should overrule the Appeals Court and say very simply: > >"This man was and is a citizen. His presence overseas did not cause him >to lose his citizenship. If he faces charges, he faces them in a U.S. >court with full access to lawyers, full habeas corpus rights, full >rights to face his accusers, and so on." > >And the Supremes ought to chastise the Bush Administration for thinking >otherwise. > >--Tim May > The supposed justification is that the guy was picked up on the battlefield. I say that on a battlefield, war or no war, they guy's citizenship is irrelevant. Where I differ with the current decision is that once he is detained, effectively removed from battle, his citizenship becomes of paramount importance. Some might argue that there is some sort of intelligence issue in between the two states. Perhaps.
So I agree, you are right in what you say but watch what happens if Shrub gets to place more justices in the federal system. It'll get worse than it already is. M
