Drug Wars tooooo close to home!

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

The Supreme Court relies heavily on precedent which limits the interpretation of any one justice.


It took the Supreme Court awhile, but it did affirm the prisoners at Gitmo do have constitutional rights, albeit limited because of their status as prisoners of war.

Nor does it make Enemy Combatants in Gitmo "Citzens" who have all the Rights afforded under our Constitution. That is not what the Supreme Court said. Nice try....

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Nor does it make Enemy Combatants in Gitmo "Citzens" who have all the Rights afforded under our Constitution. That is not what the Supreme Court said. Nice try....

Again, I never said that prisoners in Gitmo have the same rights as citizens.

I said the Court affirmed that they have some basic rights of "the people", including habeus corpus.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

Again, I never said that prisoners in Gitmo have the same rights as citizens.

I said the Court affirmed that they have some basic rights of "the people", including habeus corpus.

They have "limited" Rights, nothing more nothing less. I would agree they should just close Gitmo. But Obama has failed to follow through on this promise.