More constitutional fun

This entry was published at least two years ago (originally posted on June 16, 2002). Since that time the information may have become outdated or my beliefs may have changed (in general, assume a more open and liberal current viewpoint). A fuller disclaimer is available.

Following up on a previous post, more troubling news about the blatantly unconstitutional detention of Jose Padilla:

The Justice Department, making its case in a closed meeting of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said the United States can hold Padilla until President Bush decides the war against terrorism is over

In the committee briefing Thursday, government officials said that previous court cases, including a 1942 Supreme Court case, show that U.S. citizens can qualify as ‘enemy combatants’ — the legal term the Justice Department argues allows a person to be held without trial….

The Justice Department told the committee that the executive branch alone has the power to decide when a person qualifies as a combatant, an administration official said.

Now, I certainly don’t want to have a terrorist set off a “dirty bomb” — or any other type of bomb — anywhere. However, if there’s truly enough evidence to arrest Padilla, than he should be arrested and given a trial. Instead, however, an American citizen is being detained indefinitely in a blatantly unconstitutional move.

In the words of Tom Tomorrow:

There you have it, kids. By executive fiat, the Constitutional protections of American citizens are now officially contingent upon the whims of the President. So much for a nation of ‘laws, not men.’ I don’t care what your politics are. If you don’t find this deeply disturbing…well, I really don’t know what to say.