Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

From TPM = Mukasey Refuses to Say Yoo Fouth Amendment Memo Withdrawn

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
OregonBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-10-08 03:22 PM
Original message
From TPM = Mukasey Refuses to Say Yoo Fouth Amendment Memo Withdrawn
Edited on Thu Apr-10-08 03:23 PM by OregonBlue
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/04/mukasey_the_4th_amendment_appl.php

Mukasey Refuses to Say Yoo Fourth Amendment Memo Withdrawn
By Paul Kiel - April 10, 2008, 11:24AM

During a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing this morning, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) questioned Attorney General Michael Mukasey about that October, 2001 Justice Department memo in which John Yoo found that the Fourth Amendment, which protects citizens against "unreasonable searches and seizures," had "no application to domestic military operations."

Has that memo been withdrawn? If not, was it still in force? Feinstein wanted to know.She found it difficult to pry an answer loose. "I can't speak to the October, 2001 memo," Mukasey said when she asked whether it had been withdrawn. He said that Yoo's later March, 2003 memo -- which broadly authorized the use of torture by military interrogators on unlawful combatants -- had been withdrawn, but refused to discuss that October, 2001 memo.

Here's video of the exchange:That memo remains classified, and Mukasey said that working to declassify portions of or entire secret Justice Department legal memos by Yoo and others was a "priority" of his, but he refused to supply a timeline for when he might make those determinations. He was very mindful of Congress' "legitimate oversight role," he said.

"But Mr. Yoo's contention was that the Fourth Amendment did not apply and that the President was free to order domestic military operations," Feinstein replied.
"Without regard to the Fourth Amendment?"
"Yes."
"My understanding is that is not operative."


Note in this article that Mukasey states that there are no ongoing military operations, he was not asked if any domestic military operations were planned. He only stated that the fourth amendment does apply to domestic military operations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
NightWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-10-08 03:23 PM
Response to Original message
1. Hide your shit the government's coming for it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobthedrummer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-10-08 03:28 PM
Response to Original message
2. Posse Comitatus forbids the use of US military in The United States of America-not HOMELAND (tm)
"Yoo's on First?" by Ray McGovern (4-10-2008 Consortium News)
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2008/041008a.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OregonBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-10-08 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. But hasn't Bush issued a signing statement giving himself the right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OregonBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-10-08 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Bush issued a signing statement that gives him the right.
In 2006, the Cheney/Bush administration used the executive power of the signing statement to suspend the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which paves the way to declare Martial Law. Federal Troops can now be used within the borders of the U. S. The John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 contains the signing statement that suspends the Posse Comitatus Act. The signing statement is a little known Presidential power that allows the Chief Executive to alter the content of a bill based on their own interpretation of that law. Past administrations have used this sparingly, the Cheney/Bush Administration has abused the privilege, virtually altering or adding to, nearly every piece of Legislation that they have not vetoed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 12:28 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC