|
North East Digital Village
The Right to Due Process
One of the fifth amendment protections afforded US citizens — and visitors in our country — is the Right to Due Process:
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; . . . nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
These passages have given us the rights we have come to expect — to take for granted . . . We expect that if arrested, we will be "read our rights" — or "Marandized". We expect to know immediately why we are being arrested. We expect that if/when we ask for an attorney — we will be given access to an attorney without delay and that we will not be pressured to provide any information until that attorney is present. We expect that we will receive formal notice of the charges against us before we appear before a judge and again, when we appear before a judge. We expect that we will appear before a judge in open court — within statutory time limits. In fact, we even expect that no law enforcement agency can confine or jail us for more than a time allotment of hours — not days, not weeks — before we are formally arrested and the process above begins.
We grew up hearing of this rights as if they were as normal and natural as our right to breathe and to move freely about our land. Our television and movies are filled with references to these basic protections — everybody knows nobody in America is ever held against their will by their government unless they are charged with a crime and a judge believes there is enough evidence to justify that arrest. Right?
Well — not so right — at least not since the PATRIOT Act has been used to strip those protections from citizens. In this section, you'll find news and articles that speak to these fifth amendments rights — and the danger we are in of losing them.
Due Process in America?
cite: by Claudia Rosenbaum, Attorney at Law, juveniledefense.com
(Claudia Rosenbaum is an associate with Imhoff & Associates, P.C., Criminal Defense Attorneys, practicing criminal defense.)
Recently, the Due Process Clause guarantees afforded by the constitution have been treated as mere discretionary guidelines. Earlier this month in New York City hundreds of protestors were held for close to three days denied their due process rights. Three days would seem like a short time to one citizen who was held in North Carolina without his due process rights for close to two years. While the situations and circumstances of arrest were much different, the refusal of law enforcement in both cases to grant fundamental constitutional rights was the same. The denial of due process meant no access to an attorney, no opportunity to post bail and no arraignment to face charges before an impartial judge. [READ COMPLETE ARTICLE]
What is due process? What happens in its absence?
cite: by Hari Heath, proliberty.com & October 2002 Idaho Observer
Where is our meaningful opportunity to be heard in a modern court when judges control the law, the rules, the evidence, the attorneys and the jury? What due process of "law" exists when unelected bureaucrats promulgate their own administrative edicts and execute them on the public by issuing decisions that deprive people of their life, liberty or property? Do appeals to contemporary courts provide any hope that due process of law will be followed and that justice will ultimately prevail? [READ COMPLETE ARTICLE]
Does Congress seek due process or political gain?
cite: Laura Parker, Kevin Johnson and Kathy Kiely, usatoday.com
The attempt by Congress — and potentially, President Bush — to step into the middle of the dispute over the fate of Terri Schiavo is an extraordinary legal and political maneuver that touches an emotional issue families across the USA privately face every day: when to let go of a loved one. . . .
But the only question for a federal court probably would be whether Terri Schiavo has been deprived of her constitutional right to due process, says Charles Fried, a law professor at Harvard University who was solicitor general during the Reagan administration. [READ COMPLETE ARTICLE]
The American judiciaries conspiracy to deny due process: Introduction to Ruchell Cinque Magee's Case
cite: By Curtis Mullins, 9 April 2001
This totalitarian Government has committed fraud to cover up two not guilty verdicts by two different juries in two different trials. Ruchell has been beaten by guards in the Court room in front of a jury, while Judge Herbert V. Walker watched and did nothing. Judge Walker instructed the jury to find Ruchell either guilty or insane. Ruchell was called a moron in the court room by Federal Judge Sam Conti, who then created false documents in furtherance of this conspiracy. Ruchell Magee was denied self-representation, prevented from meeting with the media, denied due process and habeas corpus, then sentenced to life in prison with no possibility of parole for crimes he was found not guilty of by a jury. [READ COMPLETE ARTICLE]
Suspected Terrorists Deserve Due Process
cite: Anthony Gregory, independent.org
September 15, 2005: The latest ruling of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in the Jose Padilla case is a threat to the freedom of all Americans. Judge J. Michael Luttig wrote the Court's unanimous decision, which contends that a post-9/11 Congressional resolution gave the president "the power to detain identified and committed enemies such as Padilla, who associated with al Qaeda and the Taliban regime, who took up arms against this nation in its war against these enemies, and who entered the United States for the avowed purpose of further prosecuting that war by attacking American citizens and targets on our own soil." But how do the judges even know that Padilla is guilty? It appears that in today's America, the federal government can imprison an American citizen forever by mere decree.
[READ COMPLETE ARTICLE]
Is this America? The Denial of Due Process to Asylum Seekers in the United States
cite: humanrightsfirst.org
. . . the United States has served as a refuge for those fleeing persecution and oppression. After World War II, when America and so many other nations failed to protect many refugees from Nazi persecution, the United States led the effort to establish universally recognized human rights, including "the right to seek and enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution." Although these international principles did not require countries to grant asylum, countries were absolutely prohibited from returning refugees to places where they would face persecution. Changes to American immigration law passed by Congress in 1996 have severely undermined the ability of genuine refugees to seek asylum here and have led to the mistaken return of refugees facing persecution in their home countries . . . [READ COMPLETE ARTICLE]
_/\_TO THE TOP
|
|
