Habeas Corpus
Habeas Corpus
POL201: American National Government
Instructor: Randall Norris
September 16, 2013
I would like to begin my paper when we go back in the time of war when we would hold people prisoner due to the crime or citizenship. What makes it right that due to location of the base makes it ok to not detain an illegal immigrant. I Would have to say that the courts did rule the right way in some regards to if you are not in the united states then your constitutional rights do not apply. If you are an immigrant in the united states how is it possible that they have our constitutional rights when they do not belong here. The articles that I had researched had touched on a time in 2002, When the supreme court was able to reverse a ruling for a detained alien due to where he was being detained at Guantanamo. There were five men that were detained in Guantanamo and due to the U.S. leases the land from Cuba the rule of they are aliens and did not have the rights as citizen in the United States did not apply to them. The supreme court had to give them the same treatment due to location of the detainees. In 2006 the Military Commissions Act (MCA) this act will eliminate the courts to hear habeas applications from detainees who have been designated (according to procedures established in the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005) They would then petition the courts again stating that this did not pertain to them and if it was unconstitutional that it was then called the Suspension Clause. This Clause basically states that if found to be rebellion and harmful to the public safety shall it be suspended Overall the D.C circuit did rule in both the favor for the detainee and the MCA and Suspension Clause. That basically if you are not in the United States then your rights do not apply in foreign countries. In my research I came across some videos that we had to use in class. I found these three videos to be helpful in this paper. You
POL201: American National Government
Instructor: Randall Norris
September 16, 2013
I would like to begin my paper when we go back in the time of war when we would hold people prisoner due to the crime or citizenship. What makes it right that due to location of the base makes it ok to not detain an illegal immigrant. I Would have to say that the courts did rule the right way in some regards to if you are not in the united states then your constitutional rights do not apply. If you are an immigrant in the united states how is it possible that they have our constitutional rights when they do not belong here. The articles that I had researched had touched on a time in 2002, When the supreme court was able to reverse a ruling for a detained alien due to where he was being detained at Guantanamo. There were five men that were detained in Guantanamo and due to the U.S. leases the land from Cuba the rule of they are aliens and did not have the rights as citizen in the United States did not apply to them. The supreme court had to give them the same treatment due to location of the detainees. In 2006 the Military Commissions Act (MCA) this act will eliminate the courts to hear habeas applications from detainees who have been designated (according to procedures established in the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005) They would then petition the courts again stating that this did not pertain to them and if it was unconstitutional that it was then called the Suspension Clause. This Clause basically states that if found to be rebellion and harmful to the public safety shall it be suspended Overall the D.C circuit did rule in both the favor for the detainee and the MCA and Suspension Clause. That basically if you are not in the United States then your rights do not apply in foreign countries. In my research I came across some videos that we had to use in class. I found these three videos to be helpful in this paper. You
References: Anderson, K. (2006). Law and Terror. Policy Review, (139), 3-24 Levin-Waldman. (2012). American national government. San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education Inc. Oyez. (2008). Boumediene v. Bush. IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. Retrieved from http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2007/2007_06_1195 SCOTUS Video Part 1 [Video]. Available from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6Noye3MKkg (n.d.). SCOTUS Video Part 2 [Video]. Available from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cW4nNFyym8&feature=relmfu (n.d.). SCOTUS Video Part 3 [Video]. Available from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bpdn_rFvJqA&feature=relmfu