Holy crap: Gonzales says Constitution doesn't guarantee habeas corpus

[sigma7]

In one of the most chilling public statements ever made by a U.S. Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales questioned whether the U.S. Constitution grants habeas corpus rights of a fair trial to every American.

Responding to questions from Sen. Arlen Specter at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Jan. 18, Gonzales argued that the Constitution doesn’t explicitly bestow habeas corpus rights; it merely says when the so-called Great Writ can be suspended.

“There is no expressed grant of habeas in the Constitution; there’s a prohibition against taking it away,” Gonzales said.

Gonzales’s remark left Specter, the committee’s ranking Republican, stammering.

“Wait a minute,” Specter interjected. “The Constitution says you can’t take it away except in case of rebellion or invasion. Doesn’t that mean you have the right of habeas corpus unless there’s a rebellion or invasion?”

Gonzales continued, “The Constitution doesn’t say every individual in the United States or citizen is hereby granted or assured the right of habeas corpus. It doesn’t say that. It simply says the right shall not be suspended” except in cases of rebellion or invasion.”

Now how did this guy pass the bar again? We're through the looking-glass, here, people. And this isn't a homeless crank on the streetcorner (yet) -- this is the nation's top cop.

Angels and ministers of grace, protect us.

Comments

[dvandom.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I jawdropped at that one when Colbert covered it Monday night. Rules lawyers like Gonzales need to be fed to a Gazebo.

[(Anonymous)]

Gonzales needs to be disbarred. Full stop. Then declared an enemy combatant and sent to one of the secret CIA prisons.

If I was at Harvard, I would yank his degree. Clearly he doesn't understand basic Con Law.

*sigh*

[jkgriffin.livejournal.com]

That was me, just not logged in for no apparent reason.

Re: *sigh*

[sigma7.livejournal.com]

LJ's been doing that to me periodically, too, so I have no idea how many f-locked posts I've missed. I originally typed that as "f-licked," and that does seem like an option that should only be available to paid users.

Re: *sigh*

[kateshort.livejournal.com]

There was some code-pushing on Monday; that may have something to do with it.

[jim-smith.livejournal.com]

Clearly he doesn't understand basic Con Law.

Hell with that, he doesn't seem to understand basic logic.

[begstodiffer.livejournal.com]

Dammit!

What's wrong with these jackholes? Are these people so consumed by their own anti-terror zeal that they don't hear themselves? At one time, I would have chalked this up to the democratic process and said that it's the job of each opposing faction to push their position as far as possible so that they balance each other out. But this isn't departmental tunnel vision - more like viewing the world through a coffee stirrer.

I just want to say that not every political conservative is a latent fascist.