1.29.2007

Speedy, J.D.

Have I ever mentioned how much I *heart* lawyers? Hopefully one can do good and not evil (cough cough), b.

Look what the current Attny General recently said.

You know, he's just doing his "job." You have to pay the mortgage some way.

“There is no expressed grant of habeas in the Constitution; there’s a prohibition against taking it away,” Gonzales said.

Gonzales’s remark left Specter, the committee’s ranking Republican, stammering.

“Wait a minute,” Specter interjected. “The Constitution says you can’t take it away except in case of rebellion or invasion. Doesn’t that mean you have the right of habeas corpus unless there’s a rebellion or invasion?”

Gonzales continued, “The Constitution doesn’t say every individual in the United States or citizen is hereby granted or assured the right of habeas corpus. It doesn’t say that. It simply says the right shall not be suspended” except in cases of rebellion or invasion.”

It is his job to serve, his employer. It disturbs me greatly that his "employer" is the voting public of the United States (via Bush43).

posted by nick at 2:23 PM | Permalink

1 Comment(s) - Click to View/Hide

I saw this on TV a few days ago and was filled with disgust. The argument is interesting but not very sound, especially considering J. O'Connor's recent opinion in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld: "All agree that, absent suspension, the writ of habeas corpus remains available to every individual detained within the United States." 542 U.S. 507 (2004). (Sorry for lack of a pinpoint cite, fellow law nerds. Use your browser's "search" command instead.) Yes, I realize that raises the argument about what rights those detained not within the United States may have, but for more on that read this. comment by  brian, 1/29/2007 4:46 PM