http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/11/18/eric_holders_grave_mistake_99197.html
This article is critical of Attorney General Eric Holder's decision to try one of the suspected leaders of the 9/11 terrorist attacks in New York City in a civilian court.
The interesting part of the article is when it talks about how it is NOT a violation of the Constitution to not give this guy a trial as an American citizen would. Why? Because the Constitution applies only to US citizens!! As an "enemy combatant" this suspected terrorist could be tried by the military instead of a civilian court. Remember: the Constitution only fully protects US citizens.
Should the guy be tried in New York City? Some say he should because it will show the world how fair of a justice system we have. Others say it is a mistake because he will use the trial as a forum for propaganda of his ideas. Interesting debate. I'm not sure where I fall on this issue.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree because we should not bend the rules for them if they could not stop on 9/11. Also its not in the constitution he should be tried in New York City because thats where he did all that damage at.
ReplyDelete