So does the Constitution specify that only US citizens have the rights

[Winterblues]

guaranteed or does it include any person within US boundries? I am unable to clarify that in what I have read.

[Hydra]

1. While your question is a good one

It's irrelevant. The laws currently don't apply to ANYONE- citizen or not.

[Beausoleil]

2. I look at the specific wording

There are several sections of the Constitution that use the terms "citizen" and "person", implying two different words/concepts.

Example:

Amendment 14 Section 1:

1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

This section implies that non-citizens have basic human rights, to me at least.

[Winterblues]

3. When it says "the equal protection of the laws."

Does that mean all laws created by Constitution or just a limitied few?

[nadinbrzezinski]

5. ALL laws.. yes ALL LAWS

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. and you are correct

I'd add the human rights treaties to the mix, since they are law

[truebrit71]

10. Key point "nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

..to me, that means everyone, citizen or not...

[proud2BlibKansan]

6. I have been arguing online with right wingers about this very thing

They say no. They also say if this standard had applied in WWII, we wouldn't have captured any enemy "Japs or Nazis".

I believe treating them humanely shouldn't depend on their citizenship. Imagine that! LOL

[Beausoleil]

7. That's why they had to create this little no man's land

where the Constitution and the Geneva Conventions don't apply; a little crack in the foundation of human rights the government could exploit. Jose Padilla got shoved through that crack.

I wonder how your correspondents feel about US citizens having their rights capriciously and conveniently ignored for political purposes and what makes them feel like that it can't happen to them?

When one US citizen has his rights stripped from him, we have all lost our rights. What have you lost by treating human beings as you would be treated, whether citizens or not? What do you lose when an "enemy combatant" can challenge his detention if you haven't charged him, don't have any evidence against him, don't have any proof other than some fascist calling him a "bad guy" and ultimately have to let him go? If the cases are solid, the right of habeus corpus should be a moot point. If the "bad guy" is really an innocent shmuck that got handed over to the military for a $3000 bounty, what is the point of warehousing him like a freak show exhibit and torturing him to the point of insanity?

I don't recall ever hearing about how our capturing "Japs and Nazis" during a war declared by the US Congress violated anyone's rights. Those prisoners were treated humanely in accordance with accepted international standards and were released at the end of the war. No Constitutional issue there.

[kskiska]

8. I've always thought that a person was subject to the laws

of whatever nation he happened to be in when accused of a crime. The marines accused of rape in Okinawa are usually tried by a Japanese court according to their laws. If I were visiting England or France and was suspected of commiting a crime I imagine I would be tried according to the laws of that country, and not get special treatment because I'm a foreigner. I'd assumed it was the same here. Maybe not.

[mmonk]

9. I think someone was saying because we had a controlling area.

However, it can be ruled unConstitutional on other grounds such as the Geneva Convention which
has a treaty status and thus binding on the merits of the Constitution.

[librechik]

11. This whole thing only happened because detainees had already been tortured by us

so they had to come up with some excuse to cover their asses for crimes already committed.

In WWII people deliberately surrendered to the Americans because they were known for a century to not torture prisoners and treat them well (unlike others, especially the Russians)

No more.

[crickets]

12. Bingo. -nt