About Me

Name: grassroots_conser...
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Roll

 

A Constitutional case for GTMO

No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger . . .”  - 5th Ammendment


There is cause to suspend certain liberties in war time. Notice how this particular instance applies to service members rather than civilians. So if it is not unreasonable to sequester members of our own defending force, is it any less reasonable to do as much to the attacking force? See also Article 1, Section 9: “The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.” Again it applies to US persons only, and there are exceptions.






No person shall be . . . be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law . . .”


The death penalty has provision in the Constitution.






. . . nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”


So-called eminent domain clearly may only be applied to “public use” purposes; and then it is unconstitutional to fail to grant “just compensation.” I think that means nothing less than fair market value.


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive