Peter wrote:
On 12/15/2011 12:01 PM, HeyBub wrote:

Unlawful enemy combatants (UEC) do not come under the jurisdiction
of the criminal law - they are not criminals. They are similar to
POWs, but have even fewer rights. Actually, they have no "rights" at
all. Their handling is solely up to the President under his Article
II powers. Specifically, UECs do not have a right to a lawyer,
indictment by a grand jury, jury trials, witnesses, remaining
silent, or any of the other "rights" afforded criminals.

Moreover, the President may designate ANYONE to be a UEC and,
according to the customary laws of war, dispose of them as he sees
fit. In this regard, UECs are similar to spies, fifth-columnists,
guerrillas, and saboteurs. Our very first UCE was Major John Andre
who was hanged by George Washington after a perfunctory inquiry.


I hope that is an over-simplification. What you are saying pertains
to the "customary laws of war" but since when can the President
declare war and since when are we at war with our own citizens? As
far as I know, the last time we were at war (per the Constitution)
was in 1945 prior to the Japanese surrender.

While the Congress has the sole authority to DECLARE war, the President has
the sole authority to WAGE war. The president may wage ware against whomever
he pleases, anytime he pleases. See the "Prize Cases." Remember, Bill
Clinton waged war against more countries than anyone since FDR (Albania,
Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Haiti, Sudan, Bosnia, and one other that I
forget). Moreover, the Congress passed enabling legislation back in 2001
authorizing the use of force agains al Queda and similar terrorist
organizations.

Citizenship has absolutely no bearing on whether someone is an unlawful
enemy combatant. Nor should it.


Following through with what you say, what is to keep the President
from designating his political opposition as UECs and deciding to
"dispose of them as he sees fit?" Even impeachment wouldn't protect
against a President gone wild because (according to your summary
above) the president could just declare all those who support his
impeachment to be UECs as well. Surely there's got to be some
judicial mechanism interposed to review the charges against those
accused of being UECs, even if it is a military court.

Nope, there's no provision to deal with a president that's gone rogue. The
president's action is this regard cannot be gainsaid by the courts or the
Congress. That question was raised in an appellate court some time back. The
decision of the court was that "... the president can be replaced at the
next regularly scheduled election."

Teddy Roosevelt proposed sending the U.S. Navy around the world (The White
Fleet) as a demonstration of American global reach, but Congress declined to
appropriate the money. Roosevelt responded with "I have enough money to send
the fleet HALF way around the world. Let's see if the Congress will provide
the money to get them back."