10 Nov 2005

Support the Graham Amendment

Senator Lindsay Graham (R-SC) is introducing an Amendment to the defense appropriations bill pending in the Senate (S. 1042) that would strip those designated by the Administration as enemy combatants of the ability to seek habeas review in federal courts.

This amendment is being proposed in response to the preposterous Rasul et. al. v. Bush Supreme Court ruling which for the first time in history asserted court jurisdiction over aliens detained beyond the sovereign territory of the United States and beyond the territorial jurisdiction of its courts.

In what should have been treated as the determinative precedent case, Johnson v. Eisentrager, Mr. Justice Jackson observed;

“To grant the writ to these prisoners might mean that our army must transport them across the seas for hearing. This would require allocation for shipping space, guarding personnel, billeting and rations. It might also require transportation for whatever witnesses the prisoners desired to call as well as transportation for those necessary to defend legality of the sentence. The writ, since it is held to be a matter of right, would be equally available to enemies during active hostilities as in the present twilight between war and peace. Such trials would hamper the war effort and bring aid and comfort to the enemy. They would diminish the prestige of our commanders, not only with enemies but with wavering neutrals. It would be difficult to devise more effective fettering of a field commander than to allow the very enemies he is ordered to reduce to submission to call him to account in his own civil courts and divert his efforts and attention from the military offensive abroad to the legal defensive at home. Nor is it unlikely that the result of such enemy litigiousness would be conflict between judicial and military opinion highly comforting to enemies of the United States.” 339 U.S., at 778—779.

The bed-wetting Left is organizing in opposition. The soi disant Center for Constitutional Rights is urging left-wing blogs to start beating on their tom toms over this. The least we can do is to mobilize in support.

Contact especially wavering RINOs like:

Lincoln Chaffee (R-RI) (202) 224-2921
Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) (202) 224-5344
Susan Collins (R-Maine) (202) 224-2523
Pete Domenici (R-NM) (202) 224-6621
Arlen Specter (R-Pa) (202) 224-4254
Mike Dewine (R-Oh) (202) 224-2315
Sam Brownback (R- KS) (202) 224-6521

and Florida democrat

Bill Nelson (D-Fl) (202) 224-5274

all of whom are specifically targeted by the left as potential sellouts on this one.

———–

UPDATE: Senate votes 49-42 in favor of Graham Amendment.

Susan Collins (R-Maine)
Pete Domenici (R-NM)
Mike Dewine (R-Oh)
Sam Brownback (R- KS)

4 out of 7 of the above list voted in favor.

StumbleUpon.com
One Feedback on "Support the Graham Amendment"

James Green-Armytage

Do you really think that habeas corpus for foreign nationals would be a serious impediment in fighting terrorism? All you have to do is provide a valid reason for why a given person should be held as a combatant. If there is no valid reason, then of course they shouldn’t be held in the first place, right? We don’t want to detain innocent people, do we?



Comments

Please Leave a Comment!




Please note: Comments may be moderated. It may take a while for them to show on the page.













Feeds
Entries (RSS)
Comments (RSS)
Feed Shark