home

Government Ordered to Charge or Free Jose Padilla

By Jeralyn, Section Terror Detainees
Posted on Mon Feb 28, 2005 at 03:33:02 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

A federal court today granted Jose Padilla's petition for writ of habeas corpus and ruled that the Bush Administration cannot continue to hold Jose Padilla as an enemy combatant unless it charges him with a crime. If it does not charge him, it must release him. The opinion is here.

The court finds that the president has no power, neither express nor implied, neither constitutional nor statutory, to hold petitioner as an enemy combatant," Floyd wrote in a 23-page opinion that was a stern rebuke to the government. He gave the administration 45 days to take action.

< Bernie Ebbers Testifies in World Com Trial | Michael Jackson Opening Arguments >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Government Ordered to Charge or Free Jose Padilla | 22 comments (22 topical)
    Re: Government Ordered to Charge or Free Jose Padi (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Feb 28, 2005 at 04:00:58 PM EST
    Our non government can do anything it like, after all "we our" a nation of laws right? one word "Bush." We will see the day when we are all enemy combatants under the law. by the way he can petition all he likes but if he comes up with the dollars maybe he can get out of that system?

    Re: Government Ordered to Charge or Free Jose Padi (none / 0) (#2)
    by scarshapedstar on Mon Feb 28, 2005 at 04:19:36 PM EST
    ...and what happens in 45 days? Maybe the judge will die in a small plane crash first.

    Re: Government Ordered to Charge or Free Jose Padi (none / 0) (#3)
    by Sailor on Mon Feb 28, 2005 at 05:31:59 PM EST
    He's a citizen and that should be a no brainer on dealing with him according to the constitution. Last time I looked, it has been tattered and torn by this admin, but not rent asunder.

    Re: Government Ordered to Charge or Free Jose Padi (none / 0) (#4)
    by Johnny on Mon Feb 28, 2005 at 05:51:24 PM EST
    Well, it looks like the justice system is fed up with Lincoln style justice too. Now to convince the moral majority that the constitution is actually a set of laws, not suggestions or impediments...

    Re: Government Ordered to Charge or Free Jose Padi (none / 0) (#5)
    by Adept Havelock on Mon Feb 28, 2005 at 06:14:31 PM EST
    The scary thing is this should be a no brainer, but there will be some who see no problem with locking up a citizen without charging them or a trial, and they'll beat the same tired horse of "national security" that Eugene McCarthy did. Johnny, Yes. People should be reminded it's the Bill of Rights, not the Bill of Suggestions, or the Bill of politically inconvienient things to work around. The notion of the govt. locking up anyone without charges or a trial should be beyond the pale, IMO.

    Re: Government Ordered to Charge or Free Jose Padi (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Feb 28, 2005 at 07:06:13 PM EST
    At minimum Padilla will stay in jail through the 45 days & then through a motion for reconsideration, then through the the Circuit Court of Appeal, then the appeal to the Supreme Court. If Padilla wins at all levels he will be released. Is this a great country or what?

    Re: Government Ordered to Charge or Free Jose Padi (none / 0) (#7)
    by clio on Mon Feb 28, 2005 at 08:34:35 PM EST
    If it is finally adjudicated that the President does not, and did not, have the power he has claimed, can he and members of his administration be held personally liable? It seems that somewhere I recall learning that an office holder cannot claim the shield of office to excuse obviously illegal acts. Would such a principle hold here? Could it? I assume that it could be a constitutional question. Has it been addressed in the past?

    Re: Government Ordered to Charge or Free Jose Padi (none / 0) (#8)
    by Adept Havelock on Mon Feb 28, 2005 at 08:44:54 PM EST
    If it is finally adjudicated that the President does not, and did not, have the power he has claimed, can he and members of his administration be held personally liable?
    Not as long as their party concurrently controls the other branches of the govt. ;) I am quite curious to hear from someone in the know on your latter two points.

    Re: Government Ordered to Charge or Free Jose Padi (none / 0) (#9)
    by Ray Radlein on Tue Mar 01, 2005 at 01:38:19 AM EST
    You missed the final final step in the government's endgame: After losing their way all the way up to the Supreme Court, the government will, rather than releasing him, charge him with 5,362 counts of everything they can even imagine, with a maximum combined sentence of 2,215 concurrent executions, $235,111,912 in fines, and jail time up to and through the entropic heat death of the universe — and they'll then try like hell to plead him down to anything they can. Anything at all.

    Re: Government Ordered to Charge or Free Jose Padi (none / 0) (#10)
    by john horse on Tue Mar 01, 2005 at 04:24:41 AM EST
    Ray, Your comments reminded me of this quote form Newsweek regarding the governments prosecution of Abu Ali. "Another senior law-enforcement official told NEWSWEEK that Justice was making the best of a bad situation. Even if the case ultimately collapses, an aggressive prosecution might be able to delay for years the day when Abu Ali will be able to "walk free," the official explained." The "enemy combatant" status is a prosecutor's wet dream. The one thing they don't want happening is to lose their highly publicized case and they won't have to face the possibility of losing if the case never goes to court. You don't have the evidence or have a weak case? No problem. Just call the person an "enemy combatant." Think of the implications for our system of justice. If you are attorney for someone labeled an "enemy combatant" do you suggest that they fight the charge even though that client may be incarcerated for years or do you suggest that he or she plead to a lesser charge, even though that person is innocent, in order to be released sooner?

    Re: Government Ordered to Charge or Free Jose Padi (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 01, 2005 at 05:15:09 AM EST
    Just another charge to add to the articles of impeachment in January of 2007. One can dream, can't he? What is particularly sweet about this decision, is that the judge is a Bush appointee. At least some of the judiciary still takes their job seriously.

    Re: Government Ordered to Charge or Free Jose Padi (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 01, 2005 at 05:28:56 AM EST
    I believe a lot of the judiciary take the job seriously no matter who appointed them for whatever reason. Fed Judges are one of our hopes at this point. They have traditionally been very well qualified, that is an important function of senate confirmation. A well qualified fed judiciary is a constitutional protection for democracy. Marbury v. Madison. The Court will assert its power from time to time. This would be a good time.

    Re: Government Ordered to Charge or Free Jose Padi (none / 0) (#13)
    by pigwiggle on Tue Mar 01, 2005 at 07:28:58 AM EST
    My favorite quote from the decision, "To do otherwise would not only offend the rule of law and violate this country's constitutional tradition, but it would also be a betrayal of this nation's commitment to the separation of powers that safeguards our democratic values and individual liberties." Separation of powers, individual liberties!

    Re: Government Ordered to Charge or Free Jose Padi (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 01, 2005 at 08:08:24 AM EST
    "|they'll beat the same tired horse of "national security" that Eugene McCarthy did." Surely you mean Joe McCarthy? Eugene's positions on national security issues were rather different from Joe's . . .

    Re: Government Ordered to Charge or Free Jose Padi (none / 0) (#15)
    by Adept Havelock on Tue Mar 01, 2005 at 09:06:38 AM EST
    rea- Indeed I did. Posting last night after a couple of glasses of vino. Thanks for the correction. I must remember, friends don't let friends drink and post.

    Re: Government Ordered to Charge or Free Jose Padi (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 01, 2005 at 09:11:11 AM EST
    must be one of those "activist" judges (i.e. actually doing their job) that we've been hearing about.

    Re: Government Ordered to Charge or Free Jose Padi (none / 0) (#17)
    by john horse on Tue Mar 01, 2005 at 11:53:55 AM EST
    pig, I'm glad you support individual liberties too. Please note what side Bush is on.

    Re: Government Ordered to Charge or Free Jose Padi (none / 0) (#18)
    by pigwiggle on Tue Mar 01, 2005 at 12:51:02 PM EST
    “Please note what side Bush is on.” I’ve got no illusions about what the republicans are all about. A post from yesterday- “- Haven't we learned anything from history? Just because a "majority" is for someone or something doesn't mean they're correct in doing so.” A funny thought coming from the left(?). I wonder if the ‘progressives’ have learned a lesson from the current state and will move to decentralize power when next given the opportunity; dismantle the leviathan they built over the past 70 years, most recently with the help of the Republicans. My guess, no. I imagine when next the Democrats are in power they will have forgotten the past rally of states rights and enumerated powers and promptly start using those powers they most opposed while in the minority.

    Re: Government Ordered to Charge or Free Jose Padi (none / 0) (#19)
    by rMatey on Tue Mar 01, 2005 at 06:23:58 PM EST
    The administration doesn't want to lose in court, so they argue that the detainees are neither prisoners-of-war or able to be covered in civil trials. Therefore you can't be tried, you don't have a court, either military or civil. Everyone needs to watch "Unconstitutional the war on our civil liberties" which was on our independent satellite channel. You can watch or buy a CD at www.PublicInterestPictures.org for about $9.00

    Re: Government Ordered to Charge or Free Jose Padi (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 01, 2005 at 07:40:24 PM EST
    Hi piggy, you do seem to be on the correct constitutional side of this discussion. Welcome!

    Re: Government Ordered to Charge or Free Jose Padi (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 01, 2005 at 11:53:51 PM EST
    I'm conservative to the core (please no comments on my core), but strongly agree with this one. He's an American citizen captured by civil authority on American soil. We have to draw the line somewhere. Charge him or let him go. Doing otherwise would reduce us to that which we oppose.

    Re: Government Ordered to Charge or Free Jose Padi (none / 0) (#23)
    by Sailor on Wed Mar 02, 2005 at 10:56:11 AM EST
    Well trublu I may have misunderestimated you. When I saw your posts on other topics they were so clearly faux news/rnc talking points that I just assumed you were trolling.

    Government Ordered to Charge or Free Jose Padilla | 22 comments (22 topical)