Dems Vote To Restore Habeas Corpus

[babylonsister]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/06/07/dems-vote-to-restore-habe_n_51159.html

Today the Senate Judiciary Committee passed an important bill to restore habeas corpus, the sacrosanct Constitutional right to challenge government detention in court, by a vote of eleven to eight.

Habeas corpus was revoked by last year's Military Commissions Act, which has been assailed as unconstitutional and un-American by leaders across the political spectrum. Today's habeas bill was backed by the Judiciary Committee's Democratic Chairman, Patrick Leahy, and its Republican Ranking Member, Arlen Specter. "The drive to restore this fundamental right has come from both sides of the aisle," said Sharon Bradford, an attorney at the bipartisan Constitution Project, in response to today's vote. "Restoring America's commitment to the rule of law is not a partisan cause; it is a patriotic one," she added.

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. Good chipping away at bush

and if it makes it out to senate vote and comittee, care to wager on the veto?

[BlackHawk706867]

2. On this issue, one would think that they could muster enough votes

to over come a Veto if it were to come!

ww

[Firespirit]

16. He'll veto it.

If he has the entire Republican side of the committee except Specter voting against it, then he'll have a similar margin in the Senate at large, and he'll veto it. Had they backpedaled on this, I would've said he would probably sign it just to avoid being embarrassed by having a veto overridden by his own party.

I'm going to go so far as to predict another showdown over this vote once it makes it to the Senate in bill form. Expect to see the usual fascist suspects pontificating on CSPAN about terr'ists. I SINCERELY hope that the Democrats do not cede ANY ground to them on this whatsoever, unlike their performance on the Iraq bill. If they do, it would truly be the last straw.

The question is whether we have 67. (The question is also whether we'll have Lieberman, but that's a thread unto itself.) However, 67 or no, it MUST be attempted at the very least.

[panader0]

3. Didn't Specter help pass the MCA? Has hge come to his senses?

[Atman]

10. It's an election cycle...voting against this makes for bad tv commercials.

Voting in favor of ANYTHING Bush put in place, in fact, spells doom and they know it.

|

.

[bryant69]

4. That is good news

One would think this issue would be a slam dunk.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[babylonsister]

5. How can anyone with any credibility vote against habeas corpus?

I haven't heard the arguments, but I'm sure there are some that will spin it their way.

[bryant69]

12. Usually they will change the subject to "Do you love Terrorists?"

Why do terrorists get any rights?

That sort of thing.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Atman]

6. So when Bush signs the bill, he can just add "I'm going to ignore this" to it.

Via a signing statement.

.

[babylonsister]

7. Would you prefer they didn't even try? nt

[Atman]

11. I didn't say that now, did I?

Of course that's not what I'd prefer. I'd prefer they impeach the bastard, personally, but too many on DU seem to prefer they not even try that, either. I'd prefer they do SOMETHING that will actually stick, which will actually hold Bush accountable for SOMETHING.

Whatever that is, I'm for it.

.

[babylonsister]

15. I'm with you on 'impeach the bastard', Atman. Did you hear

Woolsey signed on to back the Cheney impeachment? These are the baby steps, I know, and I'm frustrated, too.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3305706

[mondo joe]

13. Then they can challenge it. But with HC, there's not even a basis for challenge.

[ulysses]

8. good. n/t

[Lex]

9. Thanks for posting this.

:thumbsup:

[blondeatlast]

14. YES. nt

[FloridaJudy]

17. YES!!! K&R n/t