home

Myths About the Graham Habeas Amendment

Here are seventeen myths and distortions about the Graham amendment. To add your voice to the outcry against this legislation, click here.

< Habeas Rejection in Plain English | Former Iraqi Detainees Allege Torture >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: Myths About the Graham Habeas Amendment (none / 0) (#1)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:07 PM EST
    Those who live in glass houses.....
    Washington has described as flawed and unfair the trial of 15 men in Uzbekistan convicted of leading an Islamist uprising in Andijan...... The fact that the defendants all confessed their guilt on the first day raised concerns that the confessions might have been obtained by torture.
    Do we have a gulag there too? link

    Re: Myths About the Graham Habeas Amendment (none / 0) (#2)
    by wg on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:08 PM EST
    Original Graham is dead already, so it is its advertised successor Bingaman. Frenzied horsetrading currently in progress. If I understand it correctly they want to take Graham, civilize it a bit, rename it Graham-Levin and link it to McCain amendment. The goal is to give the administration Graham (restriction of access to courts, by nulling relevant Supreme Court rulings) as long as they agree to McCain's anti-torture language. I don't think administration will buy it, they like torture too much. In any case I don't like the fact that they are trying to rush it. Haste makes waste, and in matters this weighty this demeans the entire process. Furthermore the language of the proposed Graham-Levin amendment has not been published yet. This is crucial because scribes writing those things usually sneak in some stinkers that never get publicly discussed. For example the original Graham amendment (the one Wyden voted for) gave detainees the right to appeal their sentences/imprisonments but made that appeal worthless. Specifically under the original Graham-Wyden courts could only review whether a military tribunal followed its own standards and procedures, not merits of cases. I fully expect the new Graham-Levin to contain something equally smelly. They need to publish the full text and let the public debate begin.

    Re: Myths About the Graham Habeas Amendment (none / 0) (#3)
    by john horse on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:08 PM EST
    wg,
    The goal is to give the administration Graham (restriction of access to courts, by nulling relevant Supreme Court rulings) as long as they agree to McCain's anti-torture language.
    Our liberties, including habeas, are not negotiable. Isn't our court system part of our government? When Republicans pass a bill restricting the right to habeas without a hearing and in order to circumvent a decision of the Supreme Court, they demonstrate that they don't really believe in our government.

    Re: Myths About the Graham Habeas Amendment (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:08 PM EST
    Was Habeas ever suspended during WWII? I see a lot about it being suspended by Lincoln during the Civil War, but that fit neatly into the conditions necessary for constitutional suspension (e.g. during times of rebellion). If it wasn't suspended during WWII, how can we possibly argue that suspension is necessary now??

    Re: Myths About the Graham Habeas Amendment (none / 0) (#5)
    by roy on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:08 PM EST
    Was Habeas ever suspended during WWII?
    Japanese internment. The captives weren't specifically identified as enemy combatants or accused of crimes, so arguably it was worse than suspending Habeas.