You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: WoT
On S 3930, the Military Commissions Act
2006-10-01
Original content. Moved to Sunday.
The Military Commissions Act, Senate bill 3930, recently passed both the House and Senate and will be signed shortly by President Bush. One of the several concerns raised by our liberal progressive buddies is that the bill makes it possible for the President (Bush of course, no good democrat would do something like this) to whisk an American citizen away into the never-land of military commissions.

And you might begin to believe that.

You might, unless you read the legislation itself. A lay read of the bill quickly demonstrates that indeed, American citizens will not be subject to the bill.

The bill starts with the usual headers for title and table of contents. It then follows with a section, Section 948a, with 'definitions' for the terms used in the bill. These are exacting and required, as the lawyers use these terms in understanding the bill. In this section, the bill defines an 'alien' as "a person who is not a citizen of the United States." It also defines lawful and unlawful enemy combatants. But the key definition is for an alien. If you're a citizen, you're not an alien.

Further down, Sec. 948c provides us with the key section in understanding the hazard to American citizens. It's titled, 'Persons subject to military commissions'. It reads, in full, `Any alien unlawful enemy combatant is subject to trial by military commission under this chapter.'

I'm not a lawyer, but it does seem that aliens are by definition within the bill non-citizens. Further, citizens are not specifically included in Sec. 948c. Therefore, US citizens have nothing to fear from this act.

As it should be.

Further, Sec. 948d makes clear that lawful enemy combatants (defined in 948a if you want to look) also are not subject to the military commissions defined by this act.

It helps to read the legislation rather than to buy into what's being reported.
Posted by:Steve White

#2  Based on what I've read in the GUAM PDN + PACIFIC STARS-N-STRIPES, nothing much will actually change wid the Gitmo boyz save for any de facto/lawful/registered US Citizens fighting for Radical Islam now being officially entitled to a US-provided Atty for advice + litigation, plus right to evidence, BUT WE KNEW THAT ALREADY. AS FOR NON-US CITIZENS AT GITMO, ETC,, THE ARMY + USDOD + USICE, ETAL CAN HOLD THEIR ARSES FOREVER -BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2006-10-01 22:27  

#1  I expect that we will soon be treated to whining that everyone in GITMO should be charged and tried or released. Military Tribunals are for the purpose of trying those thought to be guilty of war crimes. Combatants not guilty of war crimes don't get realeased to rejoin the conflict. I imagine that a detainee that is found innocent of war crimes still goes back to the jug for the duration. I'm sure the human rights crowd understands this, and use the tribunals for another onslaught against public opinion.
Posted by: Super Hose   2006-09-30 18:02  

00:00