Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#25
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "JohnH" wrote in message The rationale behind the Court of Appeals ruling regarding Jose Padilla was that, "The president's inherent constitutional powers do not extend to the detention as an enemy combatant of American citizens without express congressional authorization." (Washington Post, December 19) John..... Point of accuracy, here, ref your quote above. According to the 2nd Circuit ruling the statement should read "...the detention as an enemy combatant of American citizens *seized on US soil*..." , an important distinction that the Court specified. The Court specifically excepted this ruling from applying to cases of US citizens seized on foreign soil as enemy combatants. Frankly, I'm not surprised that the Post would see fit to overlook this detail. JG |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Them Liberal Blues. | General |