Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
(Turner and Schulhofer, 2005)
IV. Proposed Remedy
It was reported in the Washington Post July 27th 2008 edition that "modern realities strongly argue against using the federal courts as the exclusive arena to hold or try all terrorism suspects. The first priority of a president must be to protect the country from attack. The president must have the legal flexibility to detain those against whom there is credible, actionable intelligence but not enough evidence to bring charges." (Washington Post, 2008) There are also security challenges in regards to traditional federal court proceedings. Therefore, the Washington Post report proposed a specialized national security court that would be "...Modeled after the court that processes surveillance warrants under the auspices of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)" and based in Washington with a staff of federal judges who would sit part time on the court for a set duration of time. This proposed court would be characterized by a "...separate trial scheme for detainees later charged with crimes..." And "...more relaxed evidentiary standards than those that prevail in federal court..." (Washington Post, 2008)
Summary...
Constitution be more firmly adhered to in trying these suspects. A court such as proposed by the Washington Post in its 2008 article would serve to establish a system of trial for terrorism suspects that is more adherent to Constitutional principles but however that avoids the issues and challenges of trying these individuals in the U.S. Federal Courts.
Bibliography
Workable Terrorism Trials (2008) The Washington Post. 27, 2008 Jul Editorials. Online available at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/26/AR2008072601555.html
Turner, Serrin and Sculhofer, Stephen J. (2005) The Secrecy Problem in Terrorism Trials. Liberty & National Security Project. Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law. Online available at: http://brennan.3cdn.net/2941d4bea7c3c450d2_4sm6iy66c.pdf
Civilian, Military Trails Prosecute Terrorism Suspects Differently (2009) USA Today. Online available at: http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-11-22-civilian-vs.-military-trials_N.htm
Bibliography
Workable Terrorism Trials (2008) The Washington Post. 27, 2008 Jul Editorials. Online available at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/26/AR2008072601555.html
Turner, Serrin and Sculhofer, Stephen J. (2005) The Secrecy Problem in Terrorism Trials. Liberty & National Security Project. Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law. Online available at: http://brennan.3cdn.net/2941d4bea7c3c450d2_4sm6iy66c.pdf
Civilian, Military Trails Prosecute Terrorism Suspects Differently (2009) USA Today. Online available at: http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-11-22-civilian-vs.-military-trials_N.htm
Parties: United States of America (plaintiff) v. Ramzi Ahmed Yousef, Eyad Ismoil and Abdul Hakim Murad (defendants) Facts: Ramzi Yousef, Eyad Ismoil also known as Eyad Ismail, and Abdul Hakim Murad also known as Saeed Ahmed were charged by the United States in a federal district court for conspiring to bomb twelve American commercial airlines in Southeast Asia. Following his entry in Manila, Philippines in 1994, Yousef developed a plan for the attack
Hamdan v. Rumsfeld Hamdan v Rumsfeld Case Name and Citation: The name of the case is Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U.S. 557 (2006). Salim Ahmed Hamdan is a Yemeni national, who was captured in Afghanistan in 2001. He is accused of providing material support to terrorists and was transferred to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. In 2002, the Bush Administration declared him to be an enemy combatant. They determined that he would stand trial
The VCCR clarifies the VCDR and limits the diplomatic immunities in such as way that should prevent abuses. The problem is enforceability. Many law enforcement officials on a local level are not familiar enough with the particulars of both documents to make a proper judgment. They are aware of diplomatic immunity, so in order to avoid making a potential mistake, they will not arrest someone who has any type of
In the event that the analysis of records of telephone, e-mail and internet use was considered to amount to an interference with respect for private life or correspondence, the Government contended that the interference was justified. First, it pursued the legitimate aim of protecting the rights and freedoms of others by ensuring that the facilities provided by a publicly funded employer were not abused. Secondly, the interference had a
blanket media coverage of U.S.-Iraq war has forced many other important national and international issues in the background. One of these is the controversial policy of the U.S. government regarding the prisoners kept in the Guantanamo Bay camps without trial. In this paper about the Guantanamo bay prisoners we shall explore the conditions under which they are kept, their rights under international and U.S. law, the possibility that some
Mexico faces an array of drug-related problems ranging from production and transshipment of illicit drugs to corruption, violence, and increased internal drug abuse. Powerful and well-organized Mexican organizations control drug production and trafficking in and through Mexico, as well as the laundering of drug proceeds. These organizations also have made a concerted effort to corrupt and intimidate Mexican law enforcement and public officials. In addition, the geographic proximity of