Comments on: Habeas Schmabeas – The Fate of the Great Writ http://witnessla.com/government/2007/admin/habeas-schmabeas-%e2%80%93-the-care-and-feeding-of-the-great-writ/ street news, views and stories of justice and injustice Thu, 24 May 2012 01:38:06 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Celeste Fremon http://witnessla.com/government/2007/admin/habeas-schmabeas-%e2%80%93-the-care-and-feeding-of-the-great-writ/comment-page-1/#comment-919 Celeste Fremon Tue, 01 May 2007 01:10:39 +0000 http://witnessla.com/government/2007/admin/habeas-schmabeas-%e2%80%93-the-care-and-feeding-of-the-great-writ/#comment-919 Great info, Richard. I stand corrected. Thanks. Great info, Richard. I stand corrected. Thanks.

]]> By: richard locicero http://witnessla.com/government/2007/admin/habeas-schmabeas-%e2%80%93-the-care-and-feeding-of-the-great-writ/comment-page-1/#comment-916 richard locicero Tue, 01 May 2007 00:00:48 +0000 http://witnessla.com/government/2007/admin/habeas-schmabeas-%e2%80%93-the-care-and-feeding-of-the-great-writ/#comment-916 And books can be restrained in the UK too. See the SPYCATCHER case from the eighties when a former MI-5 employee, Peter Wright was enjoined from publishing his memoirs there. They were published in Australia and here (with the lurid ads of the "Book Margaret Thatcher doesn't want you read!") and many copies bought here were smuggled into Great Britain. And books can be restrained in the UK too. See the SPYCATCHER case from the eighties when a former MI-5 employee, Peter Wright was enjoined from publishing his memoirs there. They were published in Australia and here (with the lurid ads of the “Book Margaret Thatcher doesn’t want you read!”) and many copies bought here were smuggled into Great
Britain.

]]> By: richard locicero http://witnessla.com/government/2007/admin/habeas-schmabeas-%e2%80%93-the-care-and-feeding-of-the-great-writ/comment-page-1/#comment-915 richard locicero Mon, 30 Apr 2007 23:57:53 +0000 http://witnessla.com/government/2007/admin/habeas-schmabeas-%e2%80%93-the-care-and-feeding-of-the-great-writ/#comment-915 Sorry Celeste but you do have "Prior Restraint" in the UK. Any case that is "Sub Judice" (before the courts) may not be commented on in the press under pain of contempt. That is one reason why juries in Britain aren't sequestered. Newspaper can report on cases but only report the testimony in open court. BTW I can't think of any First Amdt cases at all prior to SCHNECK or ABRAMS - you know where Justice Holmes said you couldn't "Falsely yell 'FIRE!' in a crowded theatre." Everyone forgets the "falsely" part. I assure you if the joint is blaaing away its not OK to yell "Fire" it positively a good idea! Sorry Celeste but you do have “Prior Restraint” in the UK. Any case that is “Sub Judice” (before the courts) may not be commented on in the press under pain of contempt. That is one reason why juries in Britain aren’t sequestered. Newspaper can report on cases but only report the testimony in open court.

BTW
I can’t think of any First Amdt cases at all prior to SCHNECK or ABRAMS – you know where Justice Holmes said you couldn’t “Falsely yell ‘FIRE!’ in a crowded theatre.” Everyone forgets the “falsely” part. I assure you if the joint is blaaing away its not OK to yell “Fire” it positively a good idea!

]]> By: Celeste Fremon http://witnessla.com/government/2007/admin/habeas-schmabeas-%e2%80%93-the-care-and-feeding-of-the-great-writ/comment-page-1/#comment-913 Celeste Fremon Mon, 30 Apr 2007 18:40:57 +0000 http://witnessla.com/government/2007/admin/habeas-schmabeas-%e2%80%93-the-care-and-feeding-of-the-great-writ/#comment-913 RLC, Good point. But Prior Restraint is based on British common law. (See: Sir William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England (1765)---although I think Blackstone, when talking about press freedom, called it "previous restraints.") Near V. Minnesota then enshrined it in case law. RLC, Good point. But Prior Restraint is based on British common law. (See: Sir William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England (1765)—although I think Blackstone, when talking about press freedom, called it “previous restraints.”)

Near V. Minnesota then enshrined it in case law.

]]> By: richard locicero http://witnessla.com/government/2007/admin/habeas-schmabeas-%e2%80%93-the-care-and-feeding-of-the-great-writ/comment-page-1/#comment-911 richard locicero Mon, 30 Apr 2007 17:58:17 +0000 http://witnessla.com/government/2007/admin/habeas-schmabeas-%e2%80%93-the-care-and-feeding-of-the-great-writ/#comment-911 Celeste you will not find any 1st Amdt cases on "Prior Restrain" prior to NEAR v. MINNESOTA (1932) Celeste you will not find any 1st Amdt cases on “Prior Restrain” prior to NEAR v. MINNESOTA (1932)

]]> By: listener_on_the_sidelines http://witnessla.com/government/2007/admin/habeas-schmabeas-%e2%80%93-the-care-and-feeding-of-the-great-writ/comment-page-1/#comment-910 listener_on_the_sidelines Mon, 30 Apr 2007 17:08:39 +0000 http://witnessla.com/government/2007/admin/habeas-schmabeas-%e2%80%93-the-care-and-feeding-of-the-great-writ/#comment-910 Channeling Brad DeLong.... Impeach Geroge Bush, impeach Richard Chaney, impeach Alberto Gonzales, and impeach them NOW! Emails to my senators regarding the restoration of habeas corpus rights to the detainees is in the cyber que. Thanks for alerting me to this. Channeling Brad DeLong…. Impeach Geroge Bush, impeach Richard Chaney, impeach Alberto Gonzales, and impeach them NOW!

Emails to my senators regarding the restoration of habeas corpus rights to the detainees is in the cyber que. Thanks for alerting me to this.

]]> By: Celeste Fremon http://witnessla.com/government/2007/admin/habeas-schmabeas-%e2%80%93-the-care-and-feeding-of-the-great-writ/comment-page-1/#comment-909 Celeste Fremon Mon, 30 Apr 2007 16:46:07 +0000 http://witnessla.com/government/2007/admin/habeas-schmabeas-%e2%80%93-the-care-and-feeding-of-the-great-writ/#comment-909 Article I, Section 9, says that “the privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.” Alberto (who shall be heretofore known as AG squared or AG2) had this fabulous rationale that although the Constitution said that the right to the Writ couldn't be taken away, it didn't expressly grant it. This sent Arlen Specter to sputtering, understandably, since for more 200 years the assumption has been that the clause grants the right to due process. You follow AG2's reasoning, and you have a 1st Amendment that doesn't grant the right to free speech, but simply prevents congress from abridging it. Either the guy's the most simplistic of thinkers, or he honestly doesn't respect a right so fundamental that the framers made sure it was embedded in the body of the Constitution. I find both options pretty scary. Article I, Section 9, says that “the privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.”

Alberto (who shall be heretofore known as AG squared or AG2) had this fabulous rationale that although the Constitution said that the right to the Writ couldn’t be taken away, it didn’t expressly grant it. This sent Arlen Specter to sputtering, understandably, since for more 200 years the assumption has been that the clause grants the right to due process. You follow AG2’s reasoning, and you have a 1st Amendment that doesn’t grant the right to free speech, but simply prevents congress from abridging it.

Either the guy’s the most simplistic of thinkers, or he honestly doesn’t respect a right so fundamental that the framers made sure it was embedded in the body of the Constitution. I find both options pretty scary.

]]> By: richard locicero http://witnessla.com/government/2007/admin/habeas-schmabeas-%e2%80%93-the-care-and-feeding-of-the-great-writ/comment-page-1/#comment-907 richard locicero Mon, 30 Apr 2007 16:23:50 +0000 http://witnessla.com/government/2007/admin/habeas-schmabeas-%e2%80%93-the-care-and-feeding-of-the-great-writ/#comment-907 Actually, in a way, Alberto is right, if you don't believe that the 14th Amdt is part of the Constitution - which seems to be the view of some members of The Federalist Society. The old view was the Bill of Rights restrained the Feds but didn't address the States. That all started to change as the Courts applied the clauses of the 14th (Equal Protection, Due Process) to citizen's rights in State Courts and with State (as opposed to) Federal Institutions. Guess AGAG was asleep that day when they went over that in Con Law! Actually, in a way, Alberto is right, if you don’t believe that the 14th Amdt is part of the Constitution – which seems to be the view of some members of The Federalist Society. The old view was the Bill of Rights restrained the Feds but didn’t address the States. That all started to change as the Courts applied the clauses of the 14th (Equal Protection, Due Process) to citizen’s rights in State Courts and with State (as opposed to) Federal Institutions.
Guess AGAG was asleep that day when they went over that in Con Law!

]]> By: richard locicero http://witnessla.com/government/2007/admin/habeas-schmabeas-%e2%80%93-the-care-and-feeding-of-the-great-writ/comment-page-1/#comment-906 richard locicero Mon, 30 Apr 2007 16:20:12 +0000 http://witnessla.com/government/2007/admin/habeas-schmabeas-%e2%80%93-the-care-and-feeding-of-the-great-writ/#comment-906 I noticed that some prominent conservatives - like Bruce Fein and Bob Barr - have formed a group to agitate for the elimination of the Tribunals act and Habeas is the reason. We'll probably have to wait for the next (Democratic)President though since George Bush means never having to say you made a mistake. I noticed that some prominent conservatives – like Bruce Fein and Bob Barr – have formed a group to agitate for the elimination of the Tribunals act and Habeas is the reason.

We’ll probably have to wait for the next (Democratic)President though since George Bush means never having to say you made a mistake.

]]>