Posted on Jul 27, 2015
Does bringing Guantanamo Bay Prisoners to the U.S. guarantee them the right to a speedy trial?
2.68K
5
10
1
1
0
Sixtyfour prisioners at Guantanamo bay have been deemed to dangerous to release. There is a plan in place to bring them to Supermax here in the U.S. They have been held for more than 10 years without a charge or trial. U.S. courts have already ruled they do have jurisdiction over prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. Will bringing them onto U.S. soil guarantee them the right to a speedy trial? In 2001 the U.S. Supreme court ruled detainees without a country to go to, could not be held indefinitely http://www.aol.com/article/2015/07/26/some-guantanamo-inmates-would-go-to-u-s-under-new-plan-obama-a/21214189/
Posted in these groups: 
Policy
Policy
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 3
Are these people who have been labeled as "terrorist" deserving of the protection given under a speedy trial? I understand the point of giving them their day in court but these aren't your run of the mill criminals. These are people that many of us here, pulled off the battlefield. Most of these men, if released, will undoubtedly find their way back onto that battlefield.
And to serve as a follow up, where is the DoJ going to put these guys? We can barely house the criminals already in the state-side system let alone adding these guys to it.
And to serve as a follow up, where is the DoJ going to put these guys? We can barely house the criminals already in the state-side system let alone adding these guys to it.
(0)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
It's how we treat the least among us that shows what kind of people we truly are.
It's not a case of whether they are deserving or not. It doesn't matter whether they deserve it or not. Our system is built on Equal Protection. They're supports to get these protections in spite of being less deserving. In spite of us hating everything they stand for. Because if we can use that as an excuse to deny protections, what else can we use as an excuse?
It's not a case of whether they are deserving or not. It doesn't matter whether they deserve it or not. Our system is built on Equal Protection. They're supports to get these protections in spite of being less deserving. In spite of us hating everything they stand for. Because if we can use that as an excuse to deny protections, what else can we use as an excuse?
(1)
(0)
SGT Ben Keen
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS - Interesting way to look at it. I agree that our actions of how we treat others often sets the tone for how others treat us but then you hear the stories of US Citizens held for weeks, months, years, without any contact and I wonder if others would offer us the same sort of thing we offer them.
(1)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
SGT Ben Keen Look at in reverse. Right now we've been holding these guys for 10 years without trial... Maybe they are offering them exactly what we have offered others...
(1)
(0)
SGT Ben Keen
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS - Very true, just like 99% of life, it all depends on which side of the coin you look at.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
It will "potentially" change the oversight parameters.
As it stands now, the oversight is almost exclusively weighted on the Government's side. Not just the Executive, but the Judicial as well. Shifting the prisoners to the US will give them grater access to their legal teams, and much larger legal teams.
If you isolate them in Cuba, only so many people have the resources to assist them in a meaningful way. If they are in the US, the number of players on the field increases dramatically, and this becomes a much more "fair fight."
Before anyone goes after me about these guys being Terrorists, etc. They're Prisoners, Detainees, etc. When we took them into custody, we chose to use our Justice System. WE made that decision. We tried to bypass by having a prison in an extra-jurisdictional space, which I personally think the Framers would would have had aneurysms over. They wrote so many Protections regarding Legal Issues because of a Tyrant, and if you were to read what WE did, there are marked similarities. "But this is war" doesn't cut it.
We either have a case against these guys or we don't. That's supposed to be how our system works. If we don't, we screwed the pooch. If we do, put them on trial, convict them, and lock them up forever.
As it stands now, the oversight is almost exclusively weighted on the Government's side. Not just the Executive, but the Judicial as well. Shifting the prisoners to the US will give them grater access to their legal teams, and much larger legal teams.
If you isolate them in Cuba, only so many people have the resources to assist them in a meaningful way. If they are in the US, the number of players on the field increases dramatically, and this becomes a much more "fair fight."
Before anyone goes after me about these guys being Terrorists, etc. They're Prisoners, Detainees, etc. When we took them into custody, we chose to use our Justice System. WE made that decision. We tried to bypass by having a prison in an extra-jurisdictional space, which I personally think the Framers would would have had aneurysms over. They wrote so many Protections regarding Legal Issues because of a Tyrant, and if you were to read what WE did, there are marked similarities. "But this is war" doesn't cut it.
We either have a case against these guys or we don't. That's supposed to be how our system works. If we don't, we screwed the pooch. If we do, put them on trial, convict them, and lock them up forever.
(0)
(0)
MSG (Join to see)
These prisoners are prisoners from an armed conflict. They are not afforded the rights under our constitution and should be tried by a Military Tribunal, and if convicted, sentenced by the Military Tribunal.
(0)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
MSG (Join to see) So you're saying if one of our folks was "captured" by a foreign power, they could be held indefinitely without trial, and without any Rights to be tried by a Military Tribunal at the leisure of whatever government happens to be in power at the time? Or would we scream bloody murder?
(0)
(0)
MSG (Join to see)
First, unless I missed it in the news, no country has been asking for their citzens to be returned to them. as a matter of fact, the ones that have been released we have paid countries to take them. Secondly, prior to 2009, Military Tribunals were being setup and scheduled but were suspended in 2009. And yes, I do believe they deserve their day for a trial and it should have happened by now but as previously stated, the tribunals were suspended. Third, these prisoners/terrorist should not under any circumstances receive the rights United States Citizens receive under our Constitution but should be treated humanely and should have already been tried, sentenced (if found guilty), or released.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google