1 / 17

Bush v. Franklin

Bush v. Franklin. “If there are people inside our country who are talking with al-Qaida, we want to know about it because we will not sit back and wait to be hit again.”. “He who would give up liberty for a little temporary safety deserves neither liberty nor safety.”. End the Crisis ASAP

niles
Download Presentation

Bush v. Franklin

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Bush v. Franklin “If there are people inside our country who are talking with al-Qaida, we want to know about it because we will not sit back and wait to be hit again.” “He who would give up liberty for a little temporary safety deserves neither liberty nor safety.”

  2. End the Crisis ASAP • Protect the USA domestically and abroad • Prevent treason/sabotage • Maintain law and order • Provide for displaced ppl • Govt. powers protected • Provide nat. security • 1st Amendment • 3rd Amendment • 4th Amendment • 8th Amendment • Habeas Corpus • Right to Privacy • Due Process • Rule of law • 2nd Amendment

  3. Prize Cases (1863) • Lincoln blockades Southern ports. • No approval of Congress. • USSC: Action was constitutional • CINC • State of war exists • President can respond to an insurrection/state of war.

  4. KOREMATSU v U.S. (1944) • FDR: WWII Internment camps • USSC: Internment camps are constitutional. WHY? • Pressing military necessity • Too hard to separate loyal from disloyal • Fear of espionage or sabotage • Necessary during war to protect coast

  5. Presidential Powers v. Civil Rights • Pressing military necessity • Too hard to separate loyal from disloyal • Fear of espionage or sabotage • Necessary during war to protect coast • What are some problems with these justifications?...

  6. MANZANAR: Mass Evacuation in Perspective • WHY EVACUATED? • War time fear/hysteria • Anxiety of whites on coast • High anti-Japanese sentiment after Pearl Harbor. • History of racism against ethnic Asians on West Coast.

  7. MANZANAR: Mass Evacuation in Perspective • No military necessity • No sabotage • No proven espionage • Dec 1941: U.S. military determined Japan could not attack Ca. coast. • Japanese-Am. never removed from Hawaii

  8. Youngstown Sheet and Tube v. Sawyer (1952) HISTORY • Korean War • Truman seizes steel mills due to strike USSC RULING • Seizure was unconst. • President cannot make a law (legislating). • Congress gave no authority, explicitly or implicitly • Taft-Hartley Act: 80-day cooling-off period before strike. • No constitutional authority. • Refused to broadly interpret CINC powers.

  9. Hamdi v. Rumsfeld • Term:2000-2009 • Facts of the Case  • In the fall of 2001, YaserHamdi, an American citizen, was arrested by the United States military in Afghanistan. He was accused of fighting for the Taliban against the U.S., declared an "enemy combatant,“ • 5th Amendment, right to Due Process • No access to attorney or trial • Executive power to detain "enemy combatants" and thus restrict their access to the court system. • Question • 1. Did the government violate Hamdi's Fifth Amendment right to Due Process by holding him indefinitely, without access to an attorney, based solely on an Executive Branch declaration that he was an "enemy combatant" who fought against the United States? • 2. Does the separation of powers doctrine require federal courts to defer to Executive Branch determinations that an American citizen is an "enemy combatant"? • Conclusion • Decision: YES and NO. 6 votes for Hamdi, 3 vote(s) againstLegal provision: Due Process • 1. Although Congress authorized Hamdi's detention, Fifth Amendment due process guarantees give a citizen held in the United States as an enemy combatant the right to contest that detention before a neutral decisionmaker. • 2. The plurality rejected the government's argument that the separation-of-powers prevents the judiciary from hearing Hamdi's challenge. Hamdihad the right to challenge in court his status as an enemy combatant.

More Related