Nancy Pelosi Won’t Answer Question About Osama Bin Laden Being Mirandized
A throw-away question, or an important point about the stupidity of trying enemy combatants in civilian courts?
This isn’t a silly question, and our political leaders shouldn’t be blowing it off.
Remember that, in civilian courts, a failure to have Mirandized the accused before interrogating him/her is the sort of transgression that can get cases thrown out of court. As can interrogating the accused after they’ve requested the presence of a lawyer. And those are just two basic rights afforded the accused in our court system amidst a mountain of legal precedent that restrains law enforcement officers and prosecutors and requires them to meet certain standards in making their cases.
I doubt that the US military, which is not a law enforcement agency and obviously thought they were capturing the enemy as opposed to arresting criminals, followed many of these precedents. And that’s….going to be problematic.
Because now that we’ve pushed these cases into the civilian courts, what do we do with the fact that none of the usual procedures for arresting, detaining and interrogating criminals was applied to them? Do we just ignore that in these cases?
Allowing our courts to just set aside certain rights when they’re inconvenient is a dangerous precedent to set.
Throughout the history of our country we have not tried enemy combatants in civilian courts because enemy combatants are not civilians. And arresting, detaining and trying them on the field of battle while affording them all the rights our civilian courts require is problematic for a myriad of really, really good reasons.
This was a stupid move by the Obama administration, and the repercussions from it could have serious consequences. Tags: Asshats, Domestic Issues, Politics



