strange then that wikipedia seems to think their cases both revolve around Hamdi v Rumsfeld, which is the decision that the current legislation is trying to address:
"eight of the nine justices of the Court agreed that the Executive Branch does not have the power to hold indefinitely a U.S. citizen without basic due process protections enforceable through judicial review" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamdi_v._Rumsfeld >They are in jail under completely different charges. > >In the case of the "American Taliban" he is being charged with treason >because he drew arms against his country in defense of another. His >has been sentenced to 20 years... personally he got off light, he >could have faced a firing squad. > >From what I can find on Padilla, he does not fall under the new law >either. He is a citizen that was charged in conjunction with terror >activities or attempts. In all honesty his case is one that doesn't >pass my "smell test" on *either side*. I will grant that he was held >from 2002 to 2004 in a Navy Brig, charged as an enemy combatant, >however I found an AP published timeline: > >http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/news/breaking_news/15598911.htm > >The following entry on *his* side don't pass my smell test: > >Aug. 2, 2006 - Cooke reluctantly agrees to delay trial from September >until January 2007 after both sides ask for more preparation time. >(this is after getting access to the classified mateiral to help >defense preparation) > >5 more months to prepare a defense? What fails my smell test is the >fact that if he's innocent of the charges and the government doesn't >have enough evidence to prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt, why do >his lawyers want 5 months to prepare?? Especially after the fact that >they've been working together (Padilla and his attorneys) for years >now. > >That's all well, fine and good but it does not relate to the bill just >passed and signed into law. What was just passed is ONLY for those >non-american enemy combatants being held at Gitmo. Lindh was held in >Gitmo until it was determined that he was a US citizen and Padilla was >never held in Gitmo, rather a Navy base in South Carolina. > >I'm all for letting Lindh and Padilla go through the court system... >as is their right as American citizens. The prisoners at Gitmo are >not citizens of the US. Since our government, up until the passing of >this legislation, had no legal basis for dealing with the Gitmo >detainees their lawyers (or the people that are forcing their pity on >the unappreciated) did not know what recourse they could file. It has >not been set down. > >I'm very sure that one of these public defenders will decide to take >this up to the Supreme Court, as is the correct process . We'll see >where it goes from there. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting, up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four times a year. http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:217346 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
