The purpose of habeas corpus
More from Boumediene:
Indeed, common-law habeas corpus was, above all, an adaptable remedy. Its precise application and scope changed depending upon the circumstances. See 3 Blackstone *131 (describing habeas as “the great and efficacious writ, in all manner of illegal confinement”); see also Schlup v. Delo, 513 U. S. 298, 319 (1995) (Habeas “is, at its core, an equitable remedy”); Jones v. Cunningham, 371 U. S. 236, 243 (1963) (Habeas is not “a static, narrow, formalistic remedy; its scope has grown to achieve its grand purpose”).
| Print article | This entry was posted by Gideon on June 12, 2008 at 8:55 pm, and is filed under habeas. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site. |
about 3 years ago
Scalia says, “…The category of prisoner comparable to these detainees are not the Eisentrager criminal defendants, but the more than 400,000 prisoners of war detained in the United States alone during World War II. Not a single one was accorded the right to have his detention validated by a habeas corpus action in federal court—and that despite the fact that they were present on U. S. soil.”
Do you see a problem with this? Some are saying that this ruling puts at grave risk all future possible “detainees” for reasons that are obvious (why bother capturing and keeping alive if….). Should all of the 400,000 Axis prisoners above been afforded the right to flood our legal system with Habeas appeals?
about 3 years ago
If 28 usc s. 2241 are sui generis, how can PLRA be applicable; when, PLRA are applicable only to civil cases and appeals thereon?
about 3 years ago
Since all men and women were created equal, it is only fair and just; that, all share equal justice under our Constitutional laws.
When we the people of the United States start limiting constitutional rights to minorities members, or detainees again, because they may have accidentally fallen through the cracks, it won’t be long before it’ll boils over to effect the entire nation. As such, whether a judge or justice is appointed, assigned or elected by the people’s choice and accepts that position, it is his or her duty, responsibility, and oath to preserve our Constitution for our future posterity.
It is treason to think and practice otherwise