In the United States during wartime, can the President seize an American citizen on US soil and intern him for the duration of the war as an enemy combatant, without a trial?

MonkeyOnALeash

In short answer. Yes. Research the Japanese internment during WWII. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_American_internment Oct 02 07, 6:07 AM

beaconmike

There is a great new book out by Pulitzer Prize winner Charlie Savage entitled "Takeover: The return of the imperial presidency".............where this topic is discussed at length regarding the suspension of Habeus Corpus........show me the body...........before a judge. Interestingly enough, this began in 1215 and the Magna Carta and the suspension of habeus corpus in England began the foundation for the founding of the United States. The Puritans and the Monarchists and Lord Clarendon in the 1600's. The killing of the king by the Puritans and how the Monarchists reacted when they regained power. The Puritans believed that they needed to install a non-secular ruler who would restore religious fundamentalism and so they killed the Monarchinsts king and took over. Years later the Monarchists took back the kingdom and suspended habeus corpus rights for many of the puritans and sent them to garrisons and islands where they were held without trial for years and years considered enemies of the state................'enemy combatants'................and eventually Lord Clarendon was impeached over this outrageous act, even by the Monarchists, it was considered a travesty.............the suspension of the basic right to be brought before a judge to determine what it was you were accused of and how the state and the defense could proceed. Sound familiar..........religious fundamentalists wanting to install a religious government over a secular government............it has been going on since the dawn of time and will long after we are gone. Oct 02 07, 7:34 AM

MonkeyOnALeash

It is this reason that the Second (2) Amendment is so damn important! "A well regulated Militia (def. a body of citizens enrolled for military service, and called out periodically for drill but serving full time only in emergencies.}, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Can anyone remember Ruby Ridge or Waco or.......Rodney King? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution Oct 02 07, 1:12 PM

lanfranco

Before we become hysterical, it should be pointed out that Roosevelt's Executive Order 9066, under which the Japanese-Americans/Japanese Aliens and some Italians and Germans were interned, was formally rescinded over 30 years ago. It has long been recognized that this internment order was unjust and based on no evidence, which is why reparations were paid. That is not to say that a similar order could not be issued today; but in the current climate, the government would have to come up with very serious reasons for it and would probably be fought tooth and nail by the ACLU, among other bodies. http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/150/sesq3order9066 Oct 02 07, 7:07 PM

MonkeyOnALeash

Kinda like random search when entering a train/plane/bus/ferry station or the monitoring of ANYONES communications. Both of which are based on the ambiguous Homeland Security Act? Are the reasons similar? "...The HSA is a sweeping anti-terrorism bill giving federal law enforcement agencies broad powers to monitor citizens.....concerns have also been raised in connection with the USA PATRIOT Act and the establishment of the Office of Total Information Awareness, both initiatives of the George W. Bush administration.....Political analysts and the parents of autistic children were baffled when it was learned, shortly after the passage of the HSA, that a rider to the bill had been added just prior to passage, that would shield Eli Lilly and the pharmaceutical industry from billions of dollars in anticipated lawsuits over vaccines." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeland_Security_Act What next is the only question left. THEY can do what they want, when they want. There is no Constitutional Protection any longer. Oct 02 07, 7:23 PM