Quote:
Originally Posted by Beebs
Seriously? I can think of a few people the constitution did not apply to, and they lived in the country.
The constitution is US Law, it is also civilian law, neither of which are applicable to non US citizens engaged in warfare against the US, most notably for people captured outside of the US.
This is really, really, really, fucking basic day 1 stuff.
|
Really? I suppose that's why the Supreme Court held in Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S., At 212 that the provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment " 'are universal in their application, to all persons within the territorial jurisdiction ...' "
Not to mention "A five-justice majority in Boumediene v. Bush held that the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA) violated the U.S. constitutional right of the detainees to meaningful habeas corpus review by federal civilian judges. According to the Court, the
Constitution prevents the government from barring detainees from rigorous habeas review and instead substituting military fact-finding followed only by a limited right of review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Notably, the Supreme Court did not decide which specific habeas review procedures are required by the Constitution, but instead sent the cases back to the federal district court to litigate that and related issues. The four dissenting justices would have upheld the constitutionality of the MCA's withdrawal of habeas jurisdiction."
But I guess you probably learned about such precedents on day 1 of "making shit up as I go along law academy"