Lest We Forget: Smith Voted For Proviso That Unconstitutionally Ends
Judicial Review At Govt.'s Discretion
Judicial Review At Govt.'s Discretion
While the Seattle Times was lauding Congressman Adam Smith for his "detention" efforts, trying to improve the conditions in a holding facility, they conveniently forgot to remind you that Smith voted for the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (Public Law 107–40; 50 U.S.C. 1541) that breathtakingly and with alarm in intellectual quarters around the United States said that the government had the right to indefinitely detain persons, including citizens, without any kind of judicial review whatsoever. We have a Bill of Rights and a general Constitution that is forthright in pointing out that this particular N.D.A.A. proviso is unconstitutional, and you hardly have to be a scholar to understand the plain language of that part of the Constitution. Senator Diane Feinstein from California attempted to correct the statute by amending the 2013 N.D.A.A. to restore the writ of habeas corpus, but she was voted down. At this time, we don't know what Adam Smith's position was on the Feinstein Amendment to clear up Congress's shocking, draconian legislation, but Smith is renowned for voting for bad legislation and then a year or two down the road putting on a public relations spectacle showing how he is trying to undo it, though naturally not reminding people that he voted for it in the first place. The writ of habeas corpus is a pretty simple concept, however: if any government, either local, state or federal, detains someone, the person detained has a right to judicial review, and that doesn't mean a "Kangaroo Court." They can't just disappear and drag "We the People" to some dungeon and throw the key away, at least not according to the grand treatise called the Constitution of the United States of America.
Comments
Post a Comment