To my imperfect understanding as a civilian, "extraordinary rendition" is a legal process by which anyone who is not a citizen or legal resident of the United States can be deported, often to a country where the rendition victim may be tortured or killed. There is a great deal of contention over whether rendition is constitutional, and whether the American legal system is betraying the intent of the Founders by engaging in the practice of rendition. There have been attempts to appeal the practice of rendition to the U.S. Supreme Court, all of which have failed.
Here's the tricky part: if a person is a naturalized U.S. citizen (someone who was not a citizen at birth, but became a citizen later on), that person's citizenship could potentially be revoked on the grounds that the person is a habitual criminal or a terrorist. Once the target's citizenship has been revoked, that person would be vulnerable to rendition.
Even trickier: such a revocation could be carried out in secret by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. The FISC operates in secret, off the record, and without the presence or knowledge of the defendant or even a defense lawyer. That means that a person who is being targeted under the Patriot Act and FISA usually has no idea that he or she is under investigation.
The FISC appears to have been set up on the honor system. The assumption appears to have been that there is no downside to allowing federal prosecutors and law enforcement officers to gather evidence against a target and present that evidence to a judge without the defendant or his defense attorney even being present. While most federal judges, prosecutors and LEOs are honorable people with a commitment to the principle of equal justice for all, a specialized judicial system in which the defendant is not even allowed into the courtroom, let alone allowed to speak to the court, seems ripe for abuse. For example, such a system would make it possible for corrupt prosecutors or LEOs to legally kidnap and murder an innocent victim.
Theoretically, none of the above would apply to anyone who was born on U.S. soil, because such a person would have "birthright citizenship." The citizenship of a natural-born U.S. citizen cannot be revoked under any circumstances, as to do so would be unconstitutional; it would be a violation of the 14th Amendment.
Here is the relevant section of the 14th Amendment, for anyone who needs a reminder:
Amendment XIV, Section 1:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Elizabeth Walter,
San Diego, California
Here's the tricky part: if a person is a naturalized U.S. citizen (someone who was not a citizen at birth, but became a citizen later on), that person's citizenship could potentially be revoked on the grounds that the person is a habitual criminal or a terrorist. Once the target's citizenship has been revoked, that person would be vulnerable to rendition.
Even trickier: such a revocation could be carried out in secret by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. The FISC operates in secret, off the record, and without the presence or knowledge of the defendant or even a defense lawyer. That means that a person who is being targeted under the Patriot Act and FISA usually has no idea that he or she is under investigation.
The FISC appears to have been set up on the honor system. The assumption appears to have been that there is no downside to allowing federal prosecutors and law enforcement officers to gather evidence against a target and present that evidence to a judge without the defendant or his defense attorney even being present. While most federal judges, prosecutors and LEOs are honorable people with a commitment to the principle of equal justice for all, a specialized judicial system in which the defendant is not even allowed into the courtroom, let alone allowed to speak to the court, seems ripe for abuse. For example, such a system would make it possible for corrupt prosecutors or LEOs to legally kidnap and murder an innocent victim.
Theoretically, none of the above would apply to anyone who was born on U.S. soil, because such a person would have "birthright citizenship." The citizenship of a natural-born U.S. citizen cannot be revoked under any circumstances, as to do so would be unconstitutional; it would be a violation of the 14th Amendment.
Here is the relevant section of the 14th Amendment, for anyone who needs a reminder:
Amendment XIV, Section 1:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Elizabeth Walter,
San Diego, California
Tags: "Tammie Lee Lawson", W890390589, "Drug Enforcement Administration", DEA, "Extraordinary Rendition", "Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act", FISA, "Patriot Act", Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, "Eastern District of Pennsylvania", “Tammie Lee Lawson”, Lawson, "Elizabeth Walter"
No comments:
Post a Comment