Dan Minette wrote: > My understanding is that, if Parliament were to pass such a > law, there would be no legal reason that courts could declare > it null and void. In the US, they could. Further, they > could, and often do, rely on precedence in interpreting the > constitution to do so. That's the sort of subtle interplay > that I didn't think was clear to non-Americans.
*g* As Charlie pointed out, precedents are a relatively common feature of the theory and practice of jurisprudence. My Dad is a lawyer, as is my brother, and so are five of my uncles and aunts. So even though the notion of precedents might be a subtle distinction for some, but it is one I not only grew up with, it is also something I studied in different courses in college and university over a number of years. What you might be unaware of is that the Indian constitution adopted the notion of judicial review from the Merkin constitution. So not only can our courts declare laws as null and void, they in the 1960s and 70s enshrined the priciple of keeping the basic structure of the constitution* sacrosanct, and thus beyond constitutional amendements. It was a necessity as the procedure to amend the constitution over here is less rigid than the one followed in the US. Moving onto the question you asked, namely how this law changes the situation, or at least why I believe it does so. Justice Luttig's opinion in the Jose Padilla case has already established the precedent that US citizens who are UEC can be held indefinitely without charges and trial. This law, in making a distinction between UEC and Alien UEC, provides the legal basis for designating citizens as UECs. The petition filed on Padilla's behalf in the Supremem Court earlier this year challenged, among other things, the President's authority to make such a designation without solid proof. The President now has the legal authority to designate citizens as UEC, and you already have the precedent regarding the treatment of people thus defined. * the basic structure doctrine encompasses the supremacy of the constitution, the rule of law, a republican democracy, the separation of powers, the federal and secular nature of the polity, and individual freedom of the individuals. Ritu _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
