From Senator Patrick Leahy, RE: Habeas Corpus

[babylonsister]

Yesterday, thanks to your help, we took an important step toward restoring one of our nation's fundamental liberties: The right to challenge one's detention by the government in a court of law.

On an 11-8 vote, the Senate Judiciary Committee passed the Habeas Corpus Restoration Act, a bipartisan bill I authored with Sen. Arlen Specter to restore Habeas rights that were taken away last year by a Military Commissions Act that was rushed by the Bush Administration through a rubberstamp Congress.

While this is an important first step in undoing the damage done to our civil liberties, our work is far from over. The bill now moves to the full Senate, where I hope it will reach the floor and be voted on this month.

Help us build momentum toward passage in the full Senate -- please email your home-state Senators today and urge them to support the Habeas Corpus Restoration Act.

Just this week, we were again reminded of the flawed nature of the Military Commissions Act, the bill that stripped Habeas rights from non-citizens and was passed just weeks before last November's midterm elections.

At the start of the first two trials at Guantanamo Bay under the new system, judges dismissed all charges because of the confusing and contradictory nature of the Act. As Duke University law professor Madeline Morris put it: "The fundamental problem is that the law was not carefully written. It was rushed through in a flurry of political pressure from the White House...and it is quite riddled with internal contradictions and anomalies."

So now we're faced with a situation where the Military Commissions Act can't even be used to prosecute the detainees held in Cuba -- the ostensible reason why it was rushed through the Congress in such a reckless way -- yet the Habeas Corpus rights of these detainees and of more than 10 million lawful permanent residents have still been removed, allowing them to be detained forever based solely on the whims of the president.

This week's court ruling reminds us once again of the fatally flawed nature of the Military Commissions Act. Help us rectify its greatest wrong by urging your home-state Senators to support the Habeas Corpus Restoration Act today.

Thanks to the support of our Leahy for Vermont online community, the Habeas Corpus Restoration Act yesterday cleared a key hurdle in the Senate Judiciary Committee. But we know that the Bush Administration will pull out all the stops to keep the current failed system -- so we need to make sure that all Senators see the support that exists throughout our country for restoring this fundamental right.

By emailing your home-state Senators today you will be helping us to restore one of our nation's founding liberties, the Great Writ of Habeas Corpus.

As we were reminded again this week, the passage of the Military Commissions Act was a huge blow to civil liberties in America. With your help, we will begin to undo this damage by passing the Habeas Corpus Restoration Act through the full Senate.

Thank you for your help and support. Once again, we can work together to make a difference.

Sincerely,


Patrick Leahy
U.S. Senator

[HCE SuiGeneris]

1. kick with an r

[Patsy Stone]

2. One will; one won't

But I'll e-mail them anyway. It's too impportant not to.

[Senator]

3. To Senator Patrick Leahy, RE: Habeas Corpus (and everything else)

Sir:

Unless you've discovered the magic potion to circumvent "Rule By Signing Statement," you're just wasting everyone's time and effort (again).

Hint: Only Impeachment ... is that potion.

It IS our positive agenda.

It is our ONLY moral, patriotic, (and legal, electoral, diplomatic...) option.

Get on with it.

----

[Hart2008]

4. Habeas Corpus was not suspended by the Military Commissions Act of 2006

(See Boumediene v. Bush):
http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200702/05-5062b.pdf
It simply deprived other lower federal courts of jurisdiction. The U.S. Supreme Court still could excercise jurisdiction to hear such cases.

The problem is that the present Supreme Court doesn't think that fundamental civil rights are very important. The Rehnquist court, at the end, heard 30% fewer cases than the Burger court did.