Patriot Act Smack
 

Jose Padilla, a US citizen, will now actually have the rights of a US citizen after a two to one ruling in the second court of appeals.

Cool!

For an opposing point of propaganda, check out lifeandliberty.gov, the US DOJ's publically-funded Patriot Act promotion page - "launched to educate Americans about how we are preserving life and liberty by using the USA PATRIOT Act."

Woo Hoo! Justice isn't dead in America. It's just been hiding under the sand and occasionally comes up for air.

Oh great, now they'll change the law so they can detain him....and us.:(

Yeah, I didn't really catch that part of it until I re-read it, later. I bet it comes up before congress pretty soon.

The judge said that the US government had no authority to keep American citizens detained without access to a lawyer or charging them with a crime. That means they can't make a law to detain him or us without charging him with a crime, which means presenting convincing evidence. The government doesn't decide for themselves what powers they do or don't have. They have only the powers specifically listed in the Constitution and they are overstepping the limits placed on their powers. It's time for government to get bitch slapped into submission.

Government needs a reminder that they are the servants and we are the masters. George W. Bush answers to me, not the other way around.

I wonder if the tide is turning on this issue? In this case the judicial branch may just be out ahead of the legislative and we may see some roll back, especially with the FBI applying PATRIOT provisions to non terror situations.

They can't "change the law so they can detain him" -- that's called "ex post facto", and the legal system watches carefully for it. You can't charge someone with something that was legal when they did it in 2002 if you make the law in 2003... you can't pass a "retroactive" law.

But don't be surprised if the decision is overturned by the USSC, on the basis that the Patriot Act, an act of congress, does in fact apply to citizens as well as non-citizens. And if they don't, look for him to be criminally charged... immediately. He will not be freed any time soon.

UT, why didn't they charge him from the gitgo? Because they didn't want to reveal what they knew and didn't know?

It's sad that we are loosing rights in America while our service men are fighting to gain other people rights on a foreign soil.:(

If he's an enemy combatant and is headed for an eventual military tribunal or something, they don't have to charge him and it makes sense for their side not to. Especially if it eventually moves to criminal court. Once they get into criminal court there is a process of discovery where both sides get access to all the facts and such.

It's scary to imagine a system where anyone can be picked up and held. But I believe there is still a process of rigorous judicial review even in the Patriot Act so it's not quite as scary as it seems at first glance. Still scary but a little less scary. But my opinion is still that the worst gumint screwups happen when we're not watching, and people are watching this like hawks.

PATRIOT II
 

I read a while back that Patriot II caught tacked on as a rider to the most recent omnibus appropriations bill so that it had to be passed basically without dissent. Now I can't find where I read that (and it scares the sh*t out of me). Can anyone confirm or deny this?

I know Bush signed it on the Saturday the announced they got Saddam. Check the news archives around then.

Re: PATRIOT II
 

Only the financial searches (bank records, financial institutions, the tip you gave your hair dresser) got tacked on and passed.



San Antonio Current Article