O brother, thou art right on
We are confident that, in light of the experience of the American colonists with the abuses of the British Crown, the Framers of our Constitution would have disapproved of the arrest, detention, and harsh confinement of a United States citizen as a "material witness" under the circumstances, and for the immediate purpose alleged, in al-Kidd’s complaint. Sadly, however, even now, more than 217 years after the ratification of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, some confidently assert that the government has the power to arrest and detain or restrict American citizens for months on end, in sometimes primitive conditions, not because there is evidence that they have committed a crime, but merely because the government wishes to investigate them for possible wrongdoing, or to prevent them from having contact with others in the outside world. We find this to be repugnant to the Constitution, and a painful reminder of some of the most ignominious chapters of our national history.Who wrote this -- some lefty? Hardly. It was this judge, appointed by this President, and the brother of you-know-who.
The whole opinion is here.
Comments (2)
Differences of opinion is one of the good reasons to have elections.
Posted by David E Gilmore | September 8, 2009 9:42 AM
Kind of smacks of the old Alien and Sedition Acts that were not so popular back in the late 1700s. Apparently, we keep forgetting history.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_and_Sedition_Acts
Of course since the Supreme Court had not yet found the power to challenge law on constitutional grounds, election was the only way to undo the travesty.....
Posted by LucsAdvo | September 8, 2009 3:24 PM