Framing the Presidency
The Nation
by Aziz Huq
02/20/07
What kind of executive branch did America’s constitutional framers have in mind? It’s a question with which federal courts are now busy wrestling. And the quality of liberty American citizens enjoy very much depends on their answers. Today, President Bush’s lawyers claim unlimited power to seize, indefinitely and without charges, individuals the Administration deems ‘enemy combatants.’ In two separate appellate court cases — one of which, Omar v. Harvey was argued earlier this month, the President’s lawyers made the following, remarkable claim: When international entanglements are involved, signified in the Omar case by a United Nationals Security Council resolution, US officials can detain a US citizen, indefinitely. Last week, the DC Court of Appeals rightly — and squarely — rejected this legally specious claim...
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070305/huq
Informant: Thomas L. Knapp
http://freepage.twoday.net/search?q=Aziz+Huq
by Aziz Huq
02/20/07
What kind of executive branch did America’s constitutional framers have in mind? It’s a question with which federal courts are now busy wrestling. And the quality of liberty American citizens enjoy very much depends on their answers. Today, President Bush’s lawyers claim unlimited power to seize, indefinitely and without charges, individuals the Administration deems ‘enemy combatants.’ In two separate appellate court cases — one of which, Omar v. Harvey was argued earlier this month, the President’s lawyers made the following, remarkable claim: When international entanglements are involved, signified in the Omar case by a United Nationals Security Council resolution, US officials can detain a US citizen, indefinitely. Last week, the DC Court of Appeals rightly — and squarely — rejected this legally specious claim...
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070305/huq
Informant: Thomas L. Knapp
http://freepage.twoday.net/search?q=Aziz+Huq
rudkla - 21. Feb, 15:22
