Well, Tomorrow is the 1st Monday....

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Justices have not concluded their session, its still ongoing.
ETA:
Session has concluded, no Heller today.

Kharn
 
Well, if they released two Big News(TM) opinions at once, CNN's poor "breaking news" banner would be overloaded. :D Maybe Monday.
 
end of today's opinions

as of 10:30 something EST the scrotus appears to have found Habeus Corpus for armed enemy combatants detained for interogation but has yet to find a clear understanding of individual rights with reguard to firearms ownership,
what a bunch of scum, :barf:

IIRC the usual result of finding armed folks in a warzone w/ out uniforms was they got shot on the spot (as spies). looks like the US military will have to go back to the old school rules as the scrotus just stuck them right between the shoulder blades, again, no point in detaining for interogation if some half wit lawyer is going to say turn em loose to shoot at you, again.:fire::fire:

my "disturbance in the force" vibes on Heller just went up about 9 orders of magnitude.:barf:
 
Actually, I support that ruling. The last thing we need is a president that can chuck you in a double-naught secret prison on his or her say-so, but I guess that is a different thread.
 
Well according to SCOTUSblog.com The court had 22 outstanding cases to decide, and released 5 of them today. We've got 17 decisions coming at the next 2 or 3 public sessions, and only one of which we (as a group) care about.

We'll know is less than two weeks. Until then, let's all take the edge off by going to the range!
 
The ruling today is intersting. Since five justices of the Supreme Court found that enemy combatants who are not citizens and have never stepped foot in the USA have rights under the Constitution, it would be very interesting in the least if they found that U.S. Citizens didn't in fact have a right that is expressly granted (i.e. acknowledged) in the Constitution.

Any individual justice who voted for the ruling today and votes against the 2nd Amendment is illegitimate. So I hope to see a 9-0 ruling at this point otherwise I am going to have some strong opinions for any justice that voted for non-citizens today and then turns around and votes against the actual citizens on Heller.
 
...otherwise I am going to have some strong opinions for any justice that voted for non-citizens today and then turns around and votes against the actual citizens on Heller.
Click to expand...

You make a good point, one with which I agree wholeheartedly...but...I sincerely doubt that the Justices give a rat's hindquarters what you, I or 20 million other people think.

Frankly, they don't and won't care unless a popular referendum could make them into a retired Justice, and just as frankly I don't think that our Constitution would be well served by have Justices whose opinion was so fickle. The most important thing that we as citizens can do is to vote for Presidents who will appoint either good Justices or not appoint the most radical ones, and to pressure our Senators to vote for the good ones and against the bad ones.
 
I think that todays ruling is good for us. If a combatant in Gitmo has constitutional rights, this (at least in my mind) acknowledges that the COTUS does not grant rights. The right to habeas is a preexisting one. Just like the RKBA.
 
as of 10:30 something EST the scrotus appears to have found Habeus Corpus for armed enemy combatants detained for interogation but has yet to find a clear understanding of individual rights with reguard to firearms ownership,
Click to expand...
blame congress for bad lawmaking. not the courts.

Congress could have passed a law clearly deciding how unlawful combatants are to be treated and instead of doing so made the situation just murkier.

Personally, I think the answer for those unlawful combatants who are captured that are not US citizens is they get a chance to talk and mitigate their punishment. The next step is a military court martial and then the noose if they choose not to talk, or fail to tell the truth.

US citizens get charged with treason, and get the same option, except it goes through the civilian courts.
 
Last edited:
divemedic said:
I think that todays ruling is good for us. If a combatant in Gitmo has constitutional rights, this (at least in my mind) acknowledges that the COTUS does not grant rights. The right to habeas is a preexisting one. Just like the RKBA.
Click to expand...
divemedic, that's the post of the week. You could put that in gigantic, red, capital letters.
 
Uh Oh!

Countdown to another Monday in June. A situation that makes dogs bark, children cry and stern men go pale thinking what tommorrow could bring! :evil:
 
Actually, I support that ruling. The last thing we need is a president that can chuck you in a double-naught secret prison on his or her say-so, but I guess that is a different thread.
Click to expand...


Yeap. Did you hear about the poor guy who got put in Gitmo for 3 years and then their like, "Ah....not enough evidence and your innocent." Sent him home.

He spent 3 YEARS in prison for a crime he didn't commit with no trial!!!!!!!!

Lost his job, house, life, everything. Imagine if that was you?
 
For some reason I think tomorrow, June 16th will be the ruling release date for D.C. vs. Heller.


.........but maybe that's just anticipation.
 
Despite the fact that I totally despise the Islamo-fascists who wish us all dead, I agree with the Habeus decision. It is the height of arrogance for the U.S. to believe that we can go into foreign countries and arbitrarily and indefinitely imprison anyone who objects to the occupation of their land. Such conduct is the exact opposite of the nation the Founding Fathers thought they had created. That is the way the 3rd Reich and the U.S.S.R. operated. We talk about spreading "Democracy" and act like the socio/political systems we regard as the ultimate manifestations of evil. America was filled with outrage when that mob burned those Blackwater Mercs and hung their remains from a bridge, but I thought "that's exactly what I would do to foreign mercenaries who came into my country to kill, humiliate, and abuse my family and countrymen." The "contractors" operate under far less restraining rules of engagement than American military and seem to have no restraints on their conduct. Imagine armed goons in blue helmets ransacking our homes and molesting our children. (U.N. "peacekeepers" seem to be pretty competent pedophiles from their record in Africa. I'm not referring to the American military here.) Imagine the Federales kicking in your door for violating Mexico's gun laws under the rules of operation for the North American Security and Prosperity Partnership. Our Government is overcome with hubris, and We the Peons are next in the sights. The U.S. Gov't is conducting training exercises in urban warfare for the Marines in Indianapolis. Why there instead of where we are currently engaged if Americans aren't the next intended targets?

Be afraid. Be VERY afraid.
 
The military dragged their feet

I agree that no one should be imprisoned without cause.

The military was given guidelines by Congress on how to handle the matter. Had they moved along and reviewed each case at a faster rate, the Liberals on the Supreme Court may no not have been in a position to rule the way they did. This ruling will have far reaching ramifications we do not even realize at this point.

Some day, soldiers on the battle field will need to video tape all captures (Miranda and all) and prove the validity of each capture in a federal court. It will bring a new meaning to "take no prisoners".

There will be no one to blame other than the liberal left in this country. :fire:
 
I don't get why people are aginst having the Gitmo guys be put in front of a jury.

The state should not be able to hold you for as long as they want without trial, I don't get how people can be pro 2nd amendment but completely ignore the rest of what the goverment does.

If you have proof, try them in front of a jury. Otherwise let them go.
 
The problem that I have here is that many of the people held in Gitmo were not captured on a battlefield, or even in a country where US forces are operating. They are not citizens of nations that are at war with the US, and deny all charges.

Simply put, we are randomly kidnapping people from all over the world, and holding them incommunicado and without trial, or torturing them until they "confess." I remember a time when we called the USSR the "evil empire" for doing the exact same thing.
 
The problem that I have here is that many of the people held in Gitmo were not captured on a battlefield, or even in a country where US forces are operating. They are not citizens of nations that are at war with the US, and deny all charges.
Click to expand...
There is no requirement at law that unlawful combatants be captured on a battlefield, nor is there any requirement that they be citizens of a country officially at war with us. There is long standing international precedent on this.

The real problem is the length of time they are being held without a determination of their status. That seems grossly unfair from the outside looking in. This is probably something congress should have dealt with but chose to just muddy the waters for political gain rather than dealing with a tough problem.

Incidentally, there is no law requiring that unlawful combatants be allowed to communicate with anyone, so the incommunicado issue is really moot.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
  • Locked
McDonald SCOTUS Decision -- Master Thread
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Replies
219
Views
17K
legaleagle_45
L
R
  • Locked
Well June is just around the corner...
Replies
7
Views
640
Rokyudai
R
B
  • Locked
US v. Stewart to be considered tomorrow!
2 3
Replies
55
Views
4K
tyme
T
armoredman
  • Locked
Heller update? Or not?
Replies
5
Views
563
armoredman
armoredman
A
  • Locked
Court sets California gun-carry case on path to Supreme Court
Replies
22
Views
2K
Librarian
Librarian
Back
Top