US court rules against US govt in Padilla case

The Bush admin. does not want his case to be judeged by the Supreme Court.

Why?

waking the latent patriotism in the hearts of even the most conservative of judges.

There will come a time when even they can see how a runaway executive branch might be used against them.

Time to adjust the scales of justice.

180

Padilla, I assume, ultimately wants to be charges with something and have his day in court, instead of being held in limbo forever. But, he is actually fighting being brought to a regular court so that the Supremos can review his case. (?) It sounds like he is sacrificing (at least for a period of time) his right to due process in his own case in order to have the chance to set the precedent for others.

His attorney's argument is to the effect that even if he is tried and acquitted, the gov't will then re-declare him an enemy combatant and keep him locked up and start everything all over again, so it's best to address the "enemy combatant" issue first.

A U.S. appeals court, acting in the case of alleged "enemy combatant" Jose Padilla, today rejected the administration's move to avoid another Supreme Court review of its powers to detain individuals without trial, blasting the government in unusually blunt terms for its behavior in the Padilla case. The unusual decision by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals stems from the administration's actions last month just as the Supreme Court was set to consider whether to review the Padilla case.

At that time, after holding him without charges for three-and-a-half years, it indicted Padilla on criminal charges and asked the 4th Circuit to have him moved from a military prison to a civilian prison, thus mooting the issues the Supreme Court might have reviewed. On top of that, it asked the appeals court to withdraw the opinion it issued that might have been considered by the justices, even though that opinion upheld the administration's position on detention.

Today, the panel that issued the opinion rejected both requests. It said the government's actions create the appearance "that the government may be attempting to avoid" Supreme Court review in a matter of "especial national importance." The opinion of the three judge panel was written by J. Michael Luttig, a conservative judge often mentioned as a Bush administration Supreme Court nominee.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/21/AR2005122101524.html?nav=rss_nation

Alito...Luttig is a loose cannon and may have some humanity left.

It's really astonishing, and yet, it's not. True conservatives are going to hold the talons of these miserable pricks to the fire.

Good for this.

I'm SERIES!1!!!!!11 This really is HUGH!1111!!!!!!11!!!!!!!!!

eric menendez..eric menendez's wife, eric menendez's talking head lawyer..eric eric eric...

but padilla and the laws * breaks over and over...ohhhhhhhhhh no00000000


no way..we get a ten year old murder story ..over and over again...

but * breaking federal laws??? fuck no..we don't want americans simple little minds to be bothered with that...

who's going to aruba for the holidays...?????????

maybe you can meet up with frog throat!!

i am going to aruba...just because the rethugs are asking for a boycott ..but in jan!!


and i will enjoy my every moment there!!

fly...

I wish they'd get rid of him. He's awful.

and that's insulting to working whores everywhere.

Is it safe to assume that he served the administration as a test case to create a precedent that allows them to decide who of us they wish to designate enemy combatants and then hold us without counsel or charges for as long as they deem fit?

And his detention is the most flagrant violation of the Constitution in this nation's history. He is totally at the whim of the executive, the personal whim of the executive. It's outrageous. Straight monarchy, and nothing else.

...of people at the beginning of the Civil War who were believed to be sympathetic to the Confederacy. Basically, he suspended habeas corpus for the duration of the Civil War.

the president is not suposed to have that power, however habeas corpus can be suspended:

"The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it." - US Constitution

I think that the civil war makes a fairly good case of falling within those reasons as it was quite the little rebellion. I do not think our current situation does so there is a significant diffrence.

Unfortunately I do not know all that much about the civil war so I can not really comment further.

where the Constitution was seriously abused and to a large extent I think it fundamentally changed our form of government. But now what we are encountering is people citing those times during that period as case precedent as to why it is ok for us to trash the Constitution today.

Really scary if you ask me.

Civil War would be a rather interesting special case, though, no, given the open fucking insurrection???

They are trying to suspend habius corpus indefinately by sneaking it in as an 'only in terrorism' cases thing... of course they would be the sole arbiters of that and it would all be very secret. People getting disapeared and such.

Fuck * and Fuck everyone who suports hime. I only wish I could have the america I used to be proud of and simultaniously doom them to the one they want to create.

In a sharp rebuke, a federal appeals court denied Wednesday a Bush administration request to transfer terrorism suspect Jose Padilla from military to civilian law enforcement custody.

The three-judge panel of the Richmond-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals also refused the administration's request to vacate a September ruling that gave President Bush wide authority to detain "enemy combatants" indefinitely without charges on U.S. soil.

The decision, written by Judge Michael Luttig, questioned why the administration used one set of facts before the court for 3 1/2 years to justify holding Padilla without charges but used another set to convince a grand jury in Florida to indict him last month.

Luttig said the administration has risked its "credibility before the courts" by appearing to use the indictment of Padilla to thwart an appeal of the appeals court's decision that gave the president wide berth in holding enemy combatants.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1430098&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312

Ashcroft announced the arrest of Padilla while on a trip to Russia. I don't know why it was announced then, Bush must have needed a poll boost. Padilla had already been in custody for a month.

on any issue? Yeah, I know: far, far, far right. ;)

the bush admin simply lying its way through these cases.

with following the law. Did they talk to the King about this?

equally concerned if not freaked about what has happened to Jose Padilla. Whether he is guilty or not, that is to be determined, but he's an American Citizen and he has been held for 3 years WITHOUT CHARGES, WITHOUT ACCESS TO COUNSEL (I remember hearing that for a long time his lawyer wasn't even allowed to ever actually meet with him) and that they have not presented any of the so-called "evidence" against him. If there has EVER been a case of someones habeas corpus rights being violated, here it is.

And all Americans should shudder at the idea that almighty, powerful President with no restrictions on his powers could declare ANY ONE OF US an Enemy Combatant and you could be detained and held - indefinitely. :scared:

I think for the Bush Administration the Padilla Case has been them testing just how far they can go. I have no doubt that they don't want this case to go to the Supreme Court right now (especially before Alito is on it) and run the risk of the whole Enemy Combatant status and "right of the President to declare it" being declared completely unconstitutional. There is no doubt that is why they tried this maneuver to transfer him to a Florida court on completely new charges.

Meanwhile, I will go on the record of saying that I worry about something "happening" to Jose Padilla while in custody....I don't know if a dead person's case could go to the Supreme Court or not. Or that they actually want him testifying to what he knows and has experienced. I hope his lawyer starts making a point of this publicly. That might "protect" him.

the * administration pissed off reporters and they have taken off their gloves and they also have pissed off the judiciary and they are doing the same.

NT!

they are still judges. They are schooled in the law and hold a degree if independent authority. This administration so typical of past republican administrations cannot control it's lust for power and eventually scares the crap out of everyone including their own team players.