Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: What part of non-citizen don't you understand? [View all]Aerows
(39,961 posts)32. It's poorly written legislation is what it is
And wide open to interpretation. You can ask ten different legal scholars what they believe, and ten of them will come up with different answers. Not good enough when it comes to securing the rights of American citizens.
EDIT: And mind you, I place the blame squarely on Congress for this nightmare, but the President should have vetoed it and sent it back for revision on the grounds that it is half a step above intelligible.
We have got to get some decent people in Congress again instead of this lot of people who have the emotional development of 3 year olds. My God, our country is better than this, and it is worthy of better people to serve it than most of these idiots.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
59 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
at least you comprehend that it only applies to foreigners. Some can't even understand that.
MjolnirTime
Dec 2011
#47
Non-citizens are human beings and deserve to have their human rights respected.
Odin2005
Dec 2011
#2
The answer is obvious: as defined by the "Commander in Chief", the military's Highest Power.
ThomWV
Dec 2011
#10
Not to mention the fact that it MANDATES detention of non-citizens, but ALLOWS detention of citizens
Capitalocracy
Dec 2011
#7
The bill gives the President the discretion to do the same to U.S. citizens
Luminous Animal
Dec 2011
#5
Padilla was kicked back to the Circuit on a technicality. His case has never been decided by the
Luminous Animal
Dec 2011
#40
Captured in Afghanistan in battle and the SC decision rested on his circumstances
Luminous Animal
Dec 2011
#42
The ACLU is apparently ignoring the fact that existing law already covers that.
phleshdef
Dec 2011
#22
"Yes, let me explain it in words that even a 5-year-old can understand …
Luminous Animal
Dec 2011
#8
It gives the authority to detain people involved with the Taliban and Al-qaeda only
bhikkhu
Dec 2011
#50
Visitors to the US, that part. Its kind of a dickmove to shitcan their human rights.
Erose999
Dec 2011
#24