Malcom "Mal" Reynolds wrote:
In article ,
"HeyBub" wrote:

Malcom "Mal" Reynolds wrote:

Right. No POW was accused of treason in the U.S. It was not because
they didn't commit acts that could be defined as treason, it was
because of the President's Article II powers.

cite please

Cite what?

The Constitution?
Article II
"The President shall be the Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy
of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when
called into the actual Service of the United States..."

This means that his powers over the military are absolute and cannot
be gainsaid by the Congress or the courts. He may order the military
to do anything he desires (see the "Prize Cases") and the only
recourse, according to one appellate opinion, is to "replace the
chief executive at the next regularly-scheduled election."

but treason is a criminal offense, you were very clear on that point,
so the President has no say in the matter


Well, no say in the "treason" business, but the president could designate
the individual an "unlawful enemy combatant" and send him to Guantanamo or
the brig in Charleston where the U.S. Attorney would be barred from access.







Several American citizens were convicted of treason during the War.

I misspoke. I should have said "convicted of treason for acts
committed during the war.




* Tomoya Kawakita

irrelevant: arrested after the war


All of your "irrelevant"s have been corrected by my revision. I'm
sorry I upset you.


Your revision doesn't change the fact that no American Citizen was
charged or tried for acts of treason during the war


How many times do I have to say I misspoke? At least five were convicted,
after the war, of treason for acts COMMITTED during wartime.





you're going to have to try harder...hint you could start by
providing that list of the "thousands" of American Citizens that
were in the US POW camps

Well, there's the de jure and the de facto. The de facto situation
is that of the 400,000 German POWs held in the U.S., the law of
averages tells us that SOME must have held U.S. citizenship due to
having been born here or having at least one parent that was a U.S.
citizen.

the law of averages is in fact not de jure or de facto



The de jure rule is that if a citizen takes up arms against the
United States, he is automatically expatriated. So, in a legal
sense, any American citizen captured on the battlefield is
automatically determined to have renounced his American citizenship.

Once again you are wrong. If a citizen takes up arms against the
United States they would be charged with Treason. There are no laws
in the United States that allow for the automatic expatriation and in
fact no citizen could be expatriated as that would imply that they
were not a citizen

It's not a law - it's a constitutional finding.




In the latter definition, then, you are correct in that there could
not have been American citizens held in U.S. POW camps. If they were
captured on the battlefield, they were not, by law, American
citizens.


However, the Supreme Court in the case of Tomoya Kawakita, one of
your previous points, said otherwise


Kawakita was not captured on the battlefield, nor did he take up arms
against the U.S.. Hence did not lose his American citizenship.