You can now be held without being charged....

[skooooo]

...according to the new Supreme Court ruling. There it is. America is dead, imo.

[Medical Speaking]

1. AMERICA

It once stood for The home of the free. Under this dumb ass Hitler
we have lost alot od our rights. He must be stopped.

Kerry 2004

[T Bone]

3. The USSC has just invalidated the Magna Carta have they not

This principle goes back further than the constitution doesn't it? Have they not just given Bush the rights kings had before the Magna Carta was signed? Disgusting.

[geek tragedy]

2. And then you can have your lawyer challenge your detention in court

and if the government has nothing on you, they court will make them release you.

BUSH LOST TODAY.

[kentuck]

6. Assuming you can get a lawyer....

:shrug:

[skooooo]

10. I don't see how you can say Bush lost..

...when the decision says they can hold American citizens without charging them with a crime.

[kentuck]

4. I am so-o-o-o-o proud of my nation...

That they would give the power to any president, but to give those powers to George W Bush, is the final nail in the coffin... :(

[Davis_X_Machina]

5. This has always been the case.

You could be held by your local police for up to 72 hours (over a weekend) without being charged prior to these rulings.

But then they have to charge you, and you can challenge the charges in court.

The extension of basically habeas corpus to the Gitmo prisoners, and to Hamdi, who was captured overseas, is a big setback to the Bush doctrine of untrammelled presidential power to detain indefinitly without trial, without counsel.

And when Padilla files suit again, with a new defendant, and cites Hamdi, he walks.

[liveoaktx]

7. That was my take on it, too, that it's more that it went BACK to a lower

court for ruling, and that SCOTUS was avoiding a pronouncement. Doubt that the lower court, which I understand ruled FOR Padilla, would violate habeus corpus and speedy trial rules.

[LeftHander]

9. That is when you arrested.....

Not being held as a "enemy combatant".

In the case of enemy combatant the President deciedes you are one. Then sometime you are allowed to challenge that designation in court. If you are found NOT to be a EC then you can be arrested and then charged of released.

The questions is how long will that process take?

72 hours...

or

72 weeks...

[LeftHander]

8. Agreed!

The biggest part of the entire ruling Bush won.

He can still call YOU a "enemy combatant" and quietly hold you until you are given your chance to challenge your "status".

The media is spinning this to hide this fact.

(Unless anyone can point to the ruling and specifically prove that the court will not allow this to occur.)

No instead of defendants defending thier guilt of innocence. People can e held untiol they prove they are not an "enemy combatant".

Basically the SC has just allowed the president to hold a person until the status is determinined to NOT be a "enemy combatant".

Where are the rules the President uses in making this determination?

Too much power has been given to Bush.