White House says ruling could free detainees in US

[Biggamehit]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200...o_bay

" WASHINGTON - The White House said Thursday that dangerous detainees at Guantanamo Bay could end up walking Main Street U.S.A. as a result of last month's Supreme Court ruling about detainees' legal rights. Federal appeals courts, however, have indicated they have no intention of letting that happen.ADVERTISEMENT

The high court ruling, which gave all detainees the right to petition federal judges for immediate release, has intensified discussions within the Bush administration about what to do with the roughly 270 detainees held at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba."

WZF

[telcoman]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200...o_bay

" WASHINGTON - The White House said Thursday that dangerous detainees at Guantanamo Bay could end up walking Main Street U.S.A. as a result of last month's Supreme Court ruling about detainees' legal rights. Federal appeals courts, however, have indicated they have no intention of letting that happen.ADVERTISEMENT

"The high court ruling, which gave all detainees the right to petition federal judges for immediate release, has intensified discussions within the Bush administration about what to do with the roughly 270 detainees held at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba."

WZF

Well if we in the United States wish to promote Democracy and attempt to export it to other parts of the world we cannot just throw people in prison without bringing charges against them with evidence.The Bush administration in suspending habeaus corpus for these people is violating our constitution and in my opinion should be impeached. Can you imagine the right wanted to impeach President Clinton for a blow job and they ok this?

Telcoman

[rn79870]

In reality, the Constitution does not protect non-citizens of the US. In fact, if it were not for the 14th. amendment, only those within the original colonies would have constitutional protection. There was a thread here recently where we looked at the difference between a person and a citizen and the rights provided. Interesting how far SCOTUS goes in defining the constitution.

[AZhitman]

Fine.

Don't detain them.

Put their asses on a C-130 TONIGHT and drop 'em off back in the sandbox.

Of course, wait for the pro-terrorlst Libby firestorm...

[skylndrftr]

AZ not supporting terrorists, but the problem here is that the president can arbitrarily detain anyone...they have repteadely done this WITH US citizens. That means they could do it with YOU and then not tell you why. I think you might have an issue with it then.

EDIT: on the topic of the statement. What a stupid and absurd thing to say. Just because they are released doesn't mean they are going to be released 1)here or 2)be able to get here after being released. Don't we have a watch list to prevent 'dangerous people' from flying? It sounds like they are saying they can't prevent terrorists from entering the conutry even after instituting many many 'layers' of security. So they are saying these peopel are dangerous because after 8 years of stopping terrorists and fighting terrrorists they can't keep them out of the country?

And as for this decision, the dissent from Scalia is frankly frightening coming from a supposed 'constitutional literalist'