Letter: Watch out as Justice Dept uses coronavirus to attack our Constitutional rights
To all civil libertarians from the right and the left, please pay attention. Authoritarian governments from around the world are now using the coronavirus as an excuse to consolidate police and judicial power in ways never seen before.
Victor Orban in Hungry is imprisoning political enemies on the pretext of stopping the spread of the coronavirus virus.
President Dudarte of the Philippines has ordered his police to murder anyone who disobeys his quarantine order.
Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil is likewise using the corona virus to incarcerate political opponents.
Benjamin Netanyahu, who could not form a coalition government and was facing trial in ten days for breach of trust, bribery, and fraud managed to hold onto the premiership by appearing on Israeli television day after day and presenting himself as the face of Israel’s fight against the coronavirus. No reporters were allowed to question him.
And then there is the United States. Under cover of the coronavirus, William Barr and the Justice Department have quietly presented draft legislative language to Congress seeking emergency power, including allowing the Attorney General to ask federal courts to suspend the writ of habeas corpus during emergencies. The writ of habeas corpus is the bedrock of American civil liberties.
It has been around for about 700 years, and it means you have a constitutional right to appear before a judge and to appeal for your release. The terrifying thing about Barr’s request is not that it would apply only to this pandemic. It goes way beyond that to include “any statute . . . affecting pre-arrest, post-arrest, trial, and post-trial procedures . . .” anytime during any “civil disobedience” or “emergency.” “Civil disobedience” and “emergency” are not defined in the draft language.
This means that federal courts can detain you indefinitely, for as long as they want, without your ever seeing a judge until the “emergency” is over.
Suspension of the writ is highly unlikely because it is embedded in the constitution. Still, it’s a good idea to keep your eyes on the bad actors who operate just beneath the surface of these national emergencies.
This is not a partisan issue. I’m siding with Utah Republican Senator, Mike Lee who, when apprised of this nefarious scheme, gasped “Over my dead body!”
Scott Newton, Jasper
Welcome to the 4th reich
This is what you get when you vote for a thinly veiled racist hegemonic reality tv star, Indiana. Then his stoolie of an AG wants to take your right to trial away from you. If youre trying to go back to civil war times to MAGA, you’ve succeeded. Dolts.
But her emails though, amirite!?!?!
If you think Democracy is still functioning in America, just look at Wisconsin today.
What’s more depressing is the this area is just going to overwhelmingly vote Red in the next election. Because most people around here are more concerned that their rights of owning an artillery piece, wailing if the government doesn’t completely adhere to Evangelical Christian law, and as long as libs continue to be owned, nothing else matters.
Your worldview is so fragile you embraced totalitarianism and corruption to keep it. You utter cowards.
All that alarm-ism only to close out your letter with “Suspension of the writ is highly unlikely because it is embedded in the constitution. Still, it’s a good idea to keep your eyes on the bad actors who operate just beneath the surface of these national emergencies.”
Seriously!
BTW welcome home Scott.
Daryl Hensley, Jasper, IN
Daryl,
Abolishing the writ would be the worst of it, but the fact is that it has already been proposed. That alone is shocking. But not as shocking as how little play it has gotten in the press. The
Freedom is chipped away when otherwise good people are not paying attention.
Scott this news story originated with Politico. If you review the timeline, they went to print with the story on March 21st at 1:01 PM. It was then regurgitated by RollingStone, Newsweek and others. The documents cited in the article were not revealed to the readers by Politico and since they didn’t provide the source documents, no one else has them. The Politico article is misleading in that it states the DOJ initiated the recommended changes when in fact Congress asked for their input in response to the Coronavirus. Politico’s title of the article is in fact false. The DOJ is not seeking new powers for the DOJ or the Executive Branch but additional powers for the Judiciary. Snopes did an investigation and this is their response.
“We were unable to independently view the documents cited by Politico. However, DOJ spokeswoman Kerri Kupec confirmed their existence by addressing the topic in a statement posted to Twitter. Kupec’s tweets stated that “confusion” related to reports about the DOJ asking Congress for “emergency powers” was “triggered by Congress asking DOJ for suggested proposals necessary to ensure that federal courts would be able to administer fair and impartial justice during pandemic.”
“Kupec stated that individual judges are already taking actions to cope with the burden on the courts during the COVID-19 crisis, and the proposal would just normalize those actions. She said the provisions “would give the Chief Judge in the [federal court] district the authority to extend deadlines and toll [pause] statute of limitations in the interests of justice. Again, individual judges already have the authority and are adjusting many deadlines.” Another proposal, she added, would allow the chief justice of the federal [court] district “to suspend the statute of limitations for criminal cases where a national emergency would materially impair the functioning of the courts.”
“Kupec added that it is ultimately up to Congress to decide whether to enact these provisions into law, and that the proposed legislation would simply give additional authority to judges. “It does not confer new powers” upon the Justice Department under the Trump administration, she stated.”
“Although the documents seen by Politico were not available to us, the spokeswoman for the Department of Justice confirmed Politico’s reporting with a statement posted to Twitter. We are therefore rating this claim “True.”
Daryl Hensley, Jasper IN
Daryl,
Whether it’s Congress seeking input from the DOJ or the DOJ sua sponte offering advice to Congress is of no import to me. In either instance, it’s a branch of the federal government considering a terrifying remedy. Federal judicial districts already have this power. This is another example of the DOJ asking Congress to give the DOJ the power to suggest to federal courts that they institute these anti-freedom measures. All in the name of national uniformity, of course. I’ve never accepted that argument. What the DOJ doesn’t admit is that it is condoning the suspension of habeas corpus, something is is constitutionally forbidden to do.
I had a con law professor who was found of asking “Who decides?” These proposed measures are not meant to stop after the Covid-19 s over. Years from now who decides what an “emergency”is and when it starts and stops? Who decides what “civil disobedience” is and when it starts and stops?
If you liked the USA Patriot Act and the revival of the FISA courts and the FISA warrants, you’ve got to be thrilled bout what’s coming down under the cover of the Covid-19 emergency.