Guantanamo bay

[Whaleboy]

...and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by skywalker

captured by civil authorities on US soil

They were captured in Afghanistan. Do you specialize in being an idiot?

Skywalker, you need some writing skills. If you meant that the US constitution didn't protect prisoners captured in Afghanistan and transported to Gitmo because they had never been on US soil then you should have said so. Reread your posts and think about how murmuring about their citizenship is not an equivalent argument.

[Kirnwaffen]

Skywalker, I believe you have totally misinterpreted those articles. Both, in my view, state that treaties entered into by the federal government take precedence over state laws and courts.

[Kuciwalker]

I believe none of my statements were incorrect. Where does the constitution say it applies to non-citizens?

[Whaleboy]

KrazyHorse: IIRC, Guantanamo bay is US soil, and certainly US military soil, thus it still applies.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Kirnwaffen
Skywalker, I believe you have totally misinterpreted those articles. Both, in my view, state that treaties entered into by the federal government take precedence over state laws and courts.

The appropriate application of that part of the clause which confers the same supremacy on laws and treaties, is to such acts of the State legislatures

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
"Geneva". Relevant quotes from the convention will appear demonstrating the necessity of a fair hearing to determine the status of prisoners.

Article 5 of the Third Convention would be a good place to start, IIRC. That's why MtG's suggestion would likely have been best for all concerned.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by elijah
KrazyHorse: IIRC, Guantanamo bay is US soil, and certainly US military soil, thus it still applies.

Let's ask MtG however, I believe it is on lease or something like that from the Cuban government, not actually US soil.

[Whaleboy]

Skywalker, find shorter articles. As Churchill said, by its very length, it defends itself against the risk of being read!

[Kuciwalker]

It's not that long... I read it

[reds4ever]

Originally posted by skywalker
I believe none of my statements were incorrect. Where does the constitution say it applies to non-citizens?

You training to be a lawyer?

[KrazyHorse]

I believe none of my statements were incorrect. Where does the constitution say it applies to non-citizens?

Where does it say it doesn't? It doesn't state (IIRC) explicitly either way, but is worded in such a way that most of the rights enumerated by it (and all of the ones relating to rights of the accused) are accorded to noncitizens as well. I'm sure Imran can tell you which decisions of the SCOTUS defend this.

[Whaleboy]

I believe it is on lease or something like that from the Cuban government, not actually US soil.

IIRC its the same status as national embassies, which, according to the simpsons, is US soil.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by reds4ever


You training to be a lawyer?

HEY!!! NO PERSONAL INSULTS

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by elijah
KrazyHorse: IIRC, Guantanamo bay is US soil,

That isn't in the terms of the lease, it's Cuban soil according to them.

"While on the one hand the United States recognizes the continuance of the ultimate sovereignty of the Republic of Cuba ... on the other hand the Republic of Cuba consents that ... the United States shall exercise complete jurisdiction and control over and within said area."

"There is a difference between territorial jurisdiction and sovereignty," writes US District Judge Howard Matz in his decision. "The court finds that Guantanamo Bay is NOT within the sovereign territory of the United States."

http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0320/p03s01-usju.html