PDA

View Full Version : US court orders "enemy combatant" freed


grimm
02-28-2005, 10:27 PM
Reuters
U.S. Court Orders 'Enemy Combatant' Freed

1 hour, 20 minutes ago

MIAMI (Reuters) - A U.S. federal judge ruled on Monday that President
Bush has no authority to order an American citizen jailed indefinitely
as an enemy combatant, and ordered terrorism suspect Jose Padilla be
released within 45 days.

Padilla, who at one time was accused of plotting to detonate a "dirty
bomb," was arrested in May 2002 and has been held without charge in a
South Carolina Navy prison under sweeping presidential powers enacted
after the Sept. 11, 2001, al Qaeda attacks.

A Justice Department official in Washington said the department would
appeal the court's decision.

Bush had designated Padilla an "enemy combatant" but U.S. District
Judge Henry Floyd ruled that the president had no authority to hold
Padilla or to suspend his right to due legal process.

"The court finds that the president has no power, neither express nor
implied, neither constitutional nor statutory, to hold Petitioner as
an enemy combatant," Floyd ruled in Spartanburg, South Carolina.

Floyd said the case was a law enforcement matter, not a military one,
and that unless Padilla is charged with a crime, he should be freed.

"If the law in its current state is found by the president to be
insufficient to protect this country from terrorist plots, such as the
one alleged here, then the president should prevail upon Congress to
remedy the problem," said Floyd, who was appointed to the federal
bench by Bush in 2003.

Padilla, a former Chicago gang member and convert to Islam, is a U.S.
citizen who was arrested at Chicago's O'Hare airport. U.S. Attorney
General John Ashcroft said at the time that Padilla was suspected of
plotting with al Qaeda to set off a radioactive "dirty bomb" in the
United States.

U.S. officials later backed off that claim and said Padilla had
plotted with al Qaeda's leaders to blow up apartment buildings by
using natural gas. None of the plots was carried out.

Padilla's attorneys argued that Bush overstepped his authority in
ordering the detention, and a federal appeals court in New York
ordered Padilla's release.

The government appealed and argued that Bush did have authority to
detain Padilla.

In June, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the New York court lacked
jurisdiction but allowed the case to be filed again in South Carolina.

The American Civil Liberties Union called the ruling "yet another
setback to the administration's misguided belief that it does not have
to follow our constitutional traditions in pursuing terrorists."

"As Judge Floyd recognized in his opinion, President Bush's actions in
the Padilla case flout the checks and balances that ensure our
democracy and liberty," ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero said

Almighty Colin
03-01-2005, 03:35 AM
There go those fucking courts again

grimm
03-01-2005, 03:56 AM
Originally posted by Almighty Colin@Mar 1 2005, 12:36 AM
There go those fucking courts again
upholding our stupid constitutional rights, again.

Almighty Colin
03-01-2005, 04:20 AM
Originally posted by grimm+Mar 1 2005, 03:57 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (grimm @ Mar 1 2005, 03:57 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Almighty Colin@Mar 1 2005, 12:36 AM
There go those fucking courts again
upholding our stupid constitutional rights, again. [/b][/quote]
It's a great system.

PornoDoggy
03-01-2005, 10:48 AM
I smell commies

Phoenix
03-01-2005, 11:18 AM
I'm sorry but when you are accused of plotting to setoff a "dirty bomb" you lose your rights for good....I am quite sure he is not 100% innocent.

Even if he was just writing about it on some dumb website he deserves to be put away. Im all for freedom to a point.

Almighty Colin
03-01-2005, 11:25 AM
Originally posted by Phoenix@Mar 1 2005, 11:19 AM
I'm sorry but when you are accused of plotting to setoff a "dirty bomb" you lose your rights for good....I am quite sure he is not 100% innocent.

Even if he was just writing about it on some dumb website he deserves to be put away. Im all for freedom to a point.
"Accused". I say 3 years is way more than reasonable to charge him with something.

Floyd sez ...
"If the law in its current state is found by the president to be
insufficient to protect this country from terrorist plots, such as the
one alleged here, then the president should prevail upon Congress to
remedy the problem".

grimm
03-01-2005, 12:51 PM
Originally posted by Phoenix@Mar 1 2005, 08:19 AM
I'm sorry but when you are accused of plotting to setoff a "dirty bomb" you lose your rights for good....I am quite sure he is not 100% innocent.

Even if he was just writing about it on some dumb website he deserves to be put away. Im all for freedom to a point.
yeah who needs freedom of speech, or the press...


the whole point was, the governement never had enough to make a prima facia case against him. and the president isnt isnt Roscoe P Coltrain and can't, himself go throwing people in jail. there are channels that assure things are done properly.

grimm
03-01-2005, 12:54 PM
Originally posted by Phoenix@Mar 1 2005, 08:19 AM
I'm sorry but when you are accused of plotting to setoff a "dirty bomb" you lose your rights for good....I am quite sure he is not 100% innocent.

Even if he was just writing about it on some dumb website he deserves to be put away. Im all for freedom to a point.
and if they did it your way, every blogger on the planet would be arrested, this website would be shut down and prosecuted, and you'd get your daily paper with whole sections blacked out.


because the (insert commies/nazis/terrorists/etc/) are hiding in the bushes;)

DrGuile
03-01-2005, 01:13 PM
"Because the president said so" isnt a valid reason to keep someone locked for life?


I am shocked and chagrined!