Quantcast

Did you know that Congress has the constitutional right to ban any Gitmo terrorist from ever having any jurisdiction to be tried on U.S. soil? Should they act to prevent all terrorists from being tried in federal courts?

Conservative in California 2009/12/15 06:31:47
I was aware, and I think Congress should ban terrorists from being tried in federal court.
I was aware, but I think Congress should not block federal courts from having jurisdiction to try terrorists
I was not aware, but I think Congress should ban terrorists from being tried in federal court.
I was not aware, and I think Congress should not block federal courts from having jurisdiction to try terrorists
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • Todd~AFCL 2009/12/15 06:48:22
    I was not aware, but I think Congress should ban terrorists from being tried ...
    Todd~AFCL
    +4
    These terrorists were taken in a military campaign, let the military deal with them as they see fit!

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • texasred 2009/12/18 03:24:03
    I was aware, and I think Congress should ban terrorists from being tried in f...
    texasred
    But you have to remember, these trials are being held here in order for the left to slam the Bush Administration. So they'll do whatever they have to do, including putting Americans at risk, to achieve this goal. Once they've done that, it wouldn't surprise me if they reopened a Gitmo-like place in order to protect our non-Christian president.
  • brandi_wine112 2009/12/17 15:16:50
    I was not aware, but I think Congress should ban terrorists from being tried ...
    brandi_wine112
    Congress has jello brains ,,,,see what drinking too much Obama kool -aid does to brain cells?

    court congress jello brains drinking obama kool -aid brain cells
  • Nicole 2009/12/16 06:53:46 (edited)
    I was not aware, but I think Congress should ban terrorists from being tried ...
    Nicole
    +1
    I did not know this. However I think they should let terrorists' be tried and convicted with jury's of the peer's of their victims. Although I am still undecided about them even having a right to a trial that would be paid for through our tax dollars...?
  • D'Art 2009/12/16 02:53:38
    I was not aware, but I think Congress should ban terrorists from being tried ...
    D'Art
    +2
    Remind congress we have a constitution and then remind Obama he swore to uphold it. Then remind them all who they work for in 2010 / 2012.
  • Beccy 2009/12/16 01:24:02
    I was not aware, but I think Congress should ban terrorists from being tried ...
    Beccy
    I was unaware of this but I do think that they have the right to a trial. We can't preach rights and then take away others rights.
  • Nicole Beccy 2009/12/16 06:56:08
    Nicole
    +1
    Agreed, however these rights should only apply to tax paying Americans because it is our tax dollars that pay for these trials.
  • Beccy Nicole 2009/12/16 23:45:33
    Beccy
    I guess I would like us to take the high road.
  • phoenix AFCL 2009/12/15 22:19:30
    I was not aware, but I think Congress should ban terrorists from being tried ...
    phoenix AFCL
    +1
    Duh.... they belong in a military court !!!
  • DanaR 2009/12/15 21:19:10
  • MrDazzling~ 2009/12/15 20:55:26
    I was aware, and I think Congress should ban terrorists from being tried in f...
    MrDazzling~
    +2
    and are you aware we are being dictated to by a bunch of liberal morons elected by a bunch of liberal morons?!
  • Sunny 2009/12/15 19:18:11
    I was not aware, but I think Congress should ban terrorists from being tried ...
    Sunny
    I would like the Constitutional reference or case law on which this statement is based. Below are the powers given to the Congress of the U.S. and a reference to the Congress under Article 2, which refers to trials and Congress's power to determine "by Law" where it is held. Has there been such a Law passed by Congress? Is this what you meant or was there some other reference? Thanks.

    I have no doubt that Congress will and has stuck its nose in many places where it is questionable as to their authority and our government has grown out of control so maybe there has been created an absolute authority to say where terrorists are tried. I personally would like to see them tried in a military court.

    Article. I; Section. 8.

    The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

    To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

    To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

    To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

    To coin Money,...















































    I would like the Constitutional reference or case law on which this statement is based. Below are the powers given to the Congress of the U.S. and a reference to the Congress under Article 2, which refers to trials and Congress's power to determine "by Law" where it is held. Has there been such a Law passed by Congress? Is this what you meant or was there some other reference? Thanks.

    I have no doubt that Congress will and has stuck its nose in many places where it is questionable as to their authority and our government has grown out of control so maybe there has been created an absolute authority to say where terrorists are tried. I personally would like to see them tried in a military court.

    Article. I; Section. 8.

    The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

    To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

    To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

    To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

    To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

    To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

    To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

    To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

    To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

    To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

    To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

    To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

    To provide and maintain a Navy;

    To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

    To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

    To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

    To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And

    To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

    With regard to the Judicial Branch:

    Article III.

    Section. 2.

    The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;--to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;--to Controversies between two or more States;-- between a State and Citizens of another State,--between Citizens of different States,--between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

    In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

    The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

    Presidential Powers

    Article II; Section. 2.

    The President shall be 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; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

    He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

    The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.
    (more)
  • Conserv... Sunny 2009/12/16 01:29:39
    Conservative in California
    Art. 3, Section 2, Clause 2: Jurisdiction of Supreme Court: "[T]he supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make."

    The last 9 words gives Congress plenary power in determining federal court jurisdiction.
  • Sunny Conserv... 2009/12/16 01:42:16
    Sunny
    This talks about the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. I was wondering about the following article that talks also about the Supreme Court's authority to determine the place of trial as directed by Law of Congress. So both seem to state that Congress has the authority to grant the Supreme Court the authority to determine where a trial is to be held when the crime was not committed in any state. However, what does the Constitution and Constitutional law say about trying those accused of treason, terrorism etc? Is it specified anywhere that they should be tried in a military court, which has always been done in the past? Why are they breaking precedent in this case?
    Article III. Section. 2.
    The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.
  • Conserv... Sunny 2009/12/16 07:31:14 (edited)
    Conservative in California
    Any and all authority the Supreme Court has, so do USDC's and Courts of Appeal. Only exception is where SCOTUS has original jurisdiction, and that is limited to ambassadors, consuls, and when States are parties.

    The ONLY power that the SCOTUS has that Congress CANNOT take away is their original jurisdiction powers.

    Other than that, Congress COULD take away federal court jurisidiction for every other case or controversy.

    As to where a person may be tried in court that is determined by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which is set by Congress.
  • Sunny Conserv... 2009/12/16 07:39:25
    Sunny
    Thank you. Good info. Always have my nose in law books because it is interesting and enlightening (and a pretty good weapon sometimes lol). So I wonder, are they justifying trying these terrorists in NY Federal Court because they do not consider actual prisoners of war or what do you think is their reasoning behind not trying them in a military tribunal?
  • Mark P. 2009/12/15 18:53:14
    I was aware, and I think Congress should ban terrorists from being tried in f...
    Mark P.
    +1
    Congress has made themselves irrelevent. The Obama admin. has side stepped Congress. Just look at the actions of the EPA. Copenhagen will be the next dance around congress. No Treaty can be approved without Congress. He is overthrowing the Constitution in record time.
  • gibyob 2009/12/15 17:42:02
    I was not aware, but I think Congress should ban terrorists from being tried ...
    gibyob
    +2
    Congress shopuld step up and stop this idiocy, but since Pelosi and the Dems are in Obama pocket it won't get a second look. We would be better off if our sericemen had just shot each and everyone of the "Enemy Combatants" with no trials, no judges or juries. This PC crap is just another nail in the coffin for our Republic.
  • judy ann 2009/12/15 17:24:43
    I was aware, and I think Congress should ban terrorists from being tried in f...
    judy ann
    +2
    the stupids don't care what we think
  • Racefish 2009/12/15 16:32:19
    I was aware, and I think Congress should ban terrorists from being tried in f...
    Racefish
    +2
    Do you think this Leftist Congress will do it? No way. They'll bend over backward to make themselves look good in the eyes of our enemies. The result is they make themselves look weak.
  • Pegasis 2009/12/15 15:51:07
    I was aware, and I think Congress should ban terrorists from being tried in f...
    Pegasis
    +2
    Not that it matters. Congress has an agenda and we we have to watch it played out their way.
  • petean05 2009/12/15 15:49:26
    I was aware, but I think Congress should not block federal courts from having...
    petean05
    I think we should always examine the chance that some of the "enemy combatants" we are holding in Gitmo are innocent bystanders. Some have already been released because they were not terrorists. I think everyone deserves a fair trial.
  • Conserv... petean05 2009/12/15 18:23:10 (edited)
    Conservative in California
    +3
    a military tribunal accomplishes that as well. Remember, not all Nazis in Nuremburg were convicted. We just don't have to sacrifice national security in the meantime.

    How is a civilian trial in fed court any more fair when the A.G. and President have already promised a conviction? How is this not simply a show trial with the outcome already determined?
  • you betcha petean05 2009/12/15 18:58:15
    you betcha
    +1
    They can get one in a military court at Gitmo where we spent millions setting up the courtroom.
  • john 2009/12/15 15:43:35
    I was aware, and I think Congress should ban terrorists from being tried in f...
    john
    Yes it is possable. But this idiot thinks he is the smartest man alive. And he will do what he wants. Weather we want it or not. He has no idea how the American system works. But he knows how he wants it to work.
  • Kane Fernau 2009/12/15 15:43:08
    I was aware, and I think Congress should ban terrorists from being tried in f...
    Kane Fernau
    If someone is tried or imprisoned on American soil they are entitled to the same rights as any American citizen.
  • no1badboy56 2009/12/15 15:41:15
    I was aware, and I think Congress should ban terrorists from being tried in f...
    no1badboy56
    +1
    Why would we want to tried in Federal Court versus a Military Court?
  • Dogzebra~PWCM~JLA 2009/12/15 15:32:54 (edited)
    I was not aware, but I think Congress should ban terrorists from being tried ...
    Dogzebra~PWCM~JLA
    +2
    Trying these murdering fanatics with a military tribunal in GITMO was fine with me. Trying them in in NYC sounds more like a presidential catch and release program to accentuate a continuum of the recent presidential apology world tour.
  • wtw 2009/12/15 15:25:50
    I was not aware, but I think Congress should ban terrorists from being tried ...
    wtw
    What law is that?
  • Conserv... wtw 2009/12/15 18:29:35
    Conservative in California
    +1
    Art. 3, Section 2, Clause 2: Jurisdiction of Supreme Court: "[T]he supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make."

    The last 9 words gives Congress plenary power in determining federal court jurisdiction.
  • wtw Conserv... 2009/12/16 05:40:24
    wtw
    Thank you!!!!!!!!
  • AV 2009/12/15 15:17:20
    I was aware, and I think Congress should ban terrorists from being tried in f...
    AV
    +1
    It's all political.
  • Covert Guy 2009/12/15 15:07:58
    I was aware, and I think Congress should ban terrorists from being tried in f...
    Covert Guy
    +1
    I picked this answer because I like the german beer fest girls, lol!!!!
    And don't you get it? This whole thing is POLITICAL!!!!!!!
    People are trying to make a name for themselves for future actions. Look to your history people...... World War One, no prisoners were ever brought to the U.S. for trial.
    World War two, same thing, Korean War, same thing, Viet Nam War, same thing.
    This whole thing is a hoax, a publicity stunt by government officials to pad their political future. Has nothing to do with justice, or right and wrong, it has to do with what the rest of the world see's america as!!!
    Our government could care less about a few americans that may or may not get killed in a terrorists jihad here at home because of those trials going on. Why we are making history here people, and americans getting killed in that process are acceptable losses in this once in a lifetime news making opportunity.
    And if you and your family happen to get killed, well, we will call you patriots after your dead, just like we did with the 9/11 deaths, happy now?
  • ImageBandit ~ American Patriot 2009/12/15 14:38:02
    I was aware, and I think Congress should ban terrorists from being tried in f...
    ImageBandit ~ American Patriot
    +2
    this is war - treat them like enemy combatants and spies
  • ken 2009/12/15 13:45:43
    I was not aware, but I think Congress should ban terrorists from being tried ...
    ken
    +1
    I was not aware but I know Congress and the President want to have them tried in our Federal courts. The Lawyers need the jobs! Just wait until the courts let them go free on a technicality. The administration is going to have to do a big face saving on that. If Obama and crew thank it is not going to happen then they are total fools
  • mjaeu 2009/12/15 13:01:28
    I was not aware, but I think Congress should ban terrorists from being tried ...
    mjaeu
    +1
    I think they have all lost their freakin minds. What good can come of treating terrorists like plain old criminals and giving them rights?? I just do not get it.
  • Jimmy the greek 2009/12/15 12:40:08 (edited)
    I was not aware, and I think Congress should not block federal courts from ha...
    Jimmy the greek
    To early It should have been # 1
  • Charles R. Anderson 2009/12/15 09:41:59
    I was not aware, but I think Congress should ban terrorists from being tried ...
    Charles R. Anderson
    Not quite any of the above. Terrorists caught in the U.S. should be tried in the regular courts. Those caught outside of the U.S. should be handled by military tribunals.
  • Larson Whipsnade 2009/12/15 09:10:46
    I was not aware, and I think Congress should not block federal courts from ha...
    Larson Whipsnade
    +1
    I don't like that. I don't like the Government having the power to just lock people up without trial, because if they can do it to some guy in Afghanistan, what's to keep them from doing it to me someday? We need to decide if these terrorists are criminals or not, and if so, try them as criminals and punish them accordingly, if not, we must treat them as POWs in accordance with the Geneva Convention. we can't just create a political oubliette to throw them into and let them rot. This is one of the very few things I lean left on.
  • Conserv... Larson ... 2009/12/15 18:32:23
    Conservative in California
    if we treated them iaw international law, we'd kill them just like spies. They have no rights.
  • Larson ... Conserv... 2009/12/15 20:59:30
    Larson Whipsnade
    that would be better than just pidgeon-holing them

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/10/23 02:42:54

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals