Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26

Thread: Supreme Court rejects hearing on military detention case

  1. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Last Seen
    11-11-15 @ 03:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,523

    Re: Supreme Court rejects hearing on military detention case

    Quote Originally Posted by Beaudreaux View Post
    The Constitution doesn't apply to Enemy Combatants and their accomplices.

    And, yes. It is great that they ruled this way.
    Journalists and "associated forces" (whoever they are) are enemy combatants and accomplices? How about those who have wrongly been declared "enemy combatants" by fiat decree? Don't forget the Executive branch can declare anyone an enemy combatant, including a US citizen, without the benefit of the judiciary and due process.

  2. #12
    Educator
    USViking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Greensboro NC USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:31 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,181

    Re: Supreme Court rejects hearing on military detention case

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    The "ruling" was simply that they opted not to rule - how was that great?

    I guess that makes "no comment" into a fantastic reply to a question.
    It was not a "no comment".

    It was an agreement with the lower court ruling.

    I anticipate a whiny little response along the lines of: "well whyyy don't they sayyyy they agree". The answer is that the lower court ruling was so obviously correct that it doesn't need any further explanation.

  3. #13
    Preserve Protect Defend
    Beaudreaux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Covfefe, NC
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    15,659

    Re: Supreme Court rejects hearing on military detention case

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob0627 View Post
    Journalists and "associated forces" (whoever they are) are enemy combatants and accomplices? How about those who have wrongly been declared "enemy combatants" by fiat decree? Don't forget the Executive branch can declare anyone an enemy combatant, including a US citizen, without the benefit of the judiciary and due process.
    The way I understand it, a US Citizen still has Habeas Corpus. The lower court ruling didn't change that.
    Everything in your life is a reflection of a choice you have made. If you want a different result, don't blame someone else, or expect others to make a change, you should stop complaining and make a different choice. Remember, the circumstances of your birth don't determine the outcome of your life.

  4. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Last Seen
    11-11-15 @ 03:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,523

    Re: Supreme Court rejects hearing on military detention case

    Quote Originally Posted by USViking View Post
    It was not a "no comment".

    It was an agreement with the lower court ruling.

    I anticipate a whiny little response along the lines of: "well whyyy don't they sayyyy they agree". The answer is that the lower court ruling was so obviously correct that it doesn't need any further explanation.
    How could SCOTUS know if it was correct or not, never mind "obviously", without deliberation (i.e. examining the facts and issues)?

  5. #15
    Educator
    USViking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Greensboro NC USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:31 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,181

    Re: Supreme Court rejects hearing on military detention case

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob0627 View Post
    How could SCOTUS know if it was correct or not, never mind "obviously", without deliberation (i.e. examining the facts and issues)?
    By reading the lower court's opinion.

  6. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Last Seen
    11-11-15 @ 03:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,523

    Re: Supreme Court rejects hearing on military detention case

    Quote Originally Posted by Beaudreaux View Post
    The way I understand it, a US Citizen still has Habeas Corpus. The lower court ruling didn't change that.
    I don't see how someone who is being detained under this NDAA provision has access to petition for Habeas Corpus without the benefit of counsel and access to any court of law. So no, I don't believe anyone detained under this provision can file a petition for Habeas Corpus in practice.

  7. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Last Seen
    11-11-15 @ 03:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,523

    Re: Supreme Court rejects hearing on military detention case

    Quote Originally Posted by USViking View Post
    By reading the lower court's opinion.
    A reading is not the same as an examination of the facts and issues. How do you even know any reading took place?

  8. #18
    Preserve Protect Defend
    Beaudreaux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Covfefe, NC
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    15,659

    Re: Supreme Court rejects hearing on military detention case

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob0627 View Post
    I don't see how someone who is being detained under this NDAA provision has access to petition for Habeas Corpus without the benefit of counsel and access to any court of law. So no, I don't believe anyone detained under this provision can file a petition for Habeas Corpus in practice.
    Maybe not. Maybe yes. It's a good question to find the answer.

    The NDAA also has a lot more goodies in it that I don't like though. Like that the President can unilaterally declare war. Even though the Constitution and the War Powers Act say otherwise. That one hasn't made it to the SCOTUS yet.
    Everything in your life is a reflection of a choice you have made. If you want a different result, don't blame someone else, or expect others to make a change, you should stop complaining and make a different choice. Remember, the circumstances of your birth don't determine the outcome of your life.

  9. #19
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    35,842

    Re: Supreme Court rejects hearing on military detention case

    Quote Originally Posted by USViking View Post
    It was not a "no comment".

    It was an agreement with the lower court ruling.

    I anticipate a whiny little response along the lines of: "well whyyy don't they sayyyy they agree". The answer is that the lower court ruling was so obviously correct that it doesn't need any further explanation.
    Then I guess that you really liked the SCOTUS CA prop 8 ruling; if the state alone refuses to argue that a ballot initiative, that passed by a majority vote, is valid then it is not. In other words, the voter's wishes can be overruled by the lack of cooperation of their own gov't - the very reason that an initiative was tried in the first place. That was a classsic "no comment" indeed.
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  10. #20
    Educator
    USViking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Greensboro NC USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:31 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,181

    Re: Supreme Court rejects hearing on military detention case

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob0627 View Post
    A reading is not the same as an examination of the facts and issues. How do you even know any reading took place?
    Every step of the judicial process is an examination of the facts and issues. You don't expect each appellate level to conduct hearings on each appeal, do you?

    I don't know what the percentages are down the line, but the US Supreme Court gets about 10,000 appeals a year, but hears only 75-80 of them. See link:

    US Supreme Court FAQ

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •