Has anyone accusing Snowden of treason actually read the Constitution?
By Alex Seitz-Wald
... Treason is the only crime specifically defined in the Constitution, and considering how much people in Washington say they love the founding document, one would think they would have read it a bit more closely, because experts say that among Snowdens potential crimes and they are crimes, in all likelihood treason is almost definitely not one of them.
Its narrow and specific definition, New York Law School professor and constitutional historian R. B. Bernstein told Salon. As described in Article III, Section 3: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. Bernstein says this means that you need to show specific intent to make war against the U.S., or aid the enemy. Theres just none of that here, he said ...
There are plenty of other crimes Snowden may be charged with, from improper use of computers to violations of the Espionage Act, but treason likely isnt one of them and lawmakers should know better. I dont care what the popular usage is, if youre talking about something in a legal context, you have to be correct, Bernstein said.
http://www.salon.com/2013/06/13/no_one_understands_what_treason_is/
atreides1
(16,072 posts)Very few have read it...
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)Had someone tell me just the other day that the 13th Amendment prohibited lawyers from serving in Congress.