|
Title: Judge Strikes President’s Authority To Designate Terrorist Groups Post by: Soldier4Christ on November 28, 2006, 09:40:19 PM Judge Strikes President’s Authority To Designate Terrorist Groups
Bakersfield Quote A federal judge has ruled that a portion of a post-Sept. 11 executive order allowing President Bush to create a list of specially designated global terrorist groups is unconstitutionally vague. U.S. District Judge Audrey Collins, in a Nov. 21 ruling released Tuesday, struck down the provision and enjoined the government from blocking the assets of two foreign groups which were placed on the list. The ruling was praised by David Cole, a lawyer for the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Constitutional Rights. “This law gave the president unfettered authority to create blacklists,” he said. “It was reminiscent of the McCarthy era.” The ruling is praised by a lawyer for terrorist sympathizing, Center For Constitutional Rights! The Center for Constitutional Rights is openly anti-American and pro-terrorist. Groups suspected of ties to terrorism give money to CCR. The granddaughter of the executed Communist spies Julius and Ethel Rosenberg works there! At its 2004 annual convention, the CCR honored attorney Lynne Stewart, an open supporter of terrorism, indicted by the Justice Department for abetting the terrorist activities of her client, the “blind sheik,” Omar Abdel Rahman. A lawyer from this organization praising this decision says just about all we need to know about the ruling. Quote The judge outlined the history of Bush’s Executive Order 13224 issued under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act in the days after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. He declared then that the “grave acts of terrorism” and the “continuing and immediate threat of future attacks” constituted a national emergency. He blocked all property and interests in property of 27 groups or individuals named as “specially designated global terrorists (SDGT).” Bush also authorized the secretary of the treasury to designate anyone who “assists, sponsors or provides services to” or is “otherwise associated with” a designated group. Collins found that Bush’s authority to designate SDGTs is “unconstitutionally vague on its face.” She also found that the provision involving those “otherwise associated with” the groups is vague and overbroad and could impinge on First Amendment rights of free association. She struck down both provisions. However, she let stand sections of the order that would penalize those who provide “services” to designated terrorist groups. She said such services would include the humanitarian aid and rights training proposed by the plaintiffs. Cole said the Humanitarian Law Project will appeal those portions of the executive order which were allowed to stand. He said the judge’s ruling does not invalidate the hundreds of SDGT designations already made but “calls them into question.” Cole said the value of the decision is it “says that even in fighting terrorism the president cannot be given a blank check to blacklist anyone he considers a bad guy or a bad group and you can’t imply guilt by association.” Yes, if you are wondering, this judge was a Clinton appointee from 1994. One Freeper suggests The President should simply create another terrorist group by executive order: JACC….Judges Appointed by Clinton and Carter. Designate the ACLU, Center for Constitutional Rights, and several more on the list of supporters while you’re at it. Of course we are slightly overexaggerating, but we should be seeing more impeachments for insanity like this. This will probably make it to SCOTUS in appeals. Title: Re: Judge Strikes President’s Authority To Designate Terrorist Groups Post by: Brother Jerry on November 30, 2006, 04:56:36 PM I am sure it will make it to the high court. You know however the first ammendment is vague as well. I have the freedom of speech as long as it does not cause possible harm to others (cannot yell fire in a movie theatre). But the first ammendment does not say that..it is just the freedom of speech. So same circumstance applies...you have the right to assembly or association as long as that association or assembly does not or can cause possible harm to others or this nation.
It is all quite simple really |