Connect with us

News

DOJ Wants Emergency Indefinite Detention Powers to Hold Americans Without Due Process

Published

on

The Justice Department has sneakily requested Congress to grant it the ability to ask chief judges to detain people indefinitely without trial during emergencies like the China virus pandemic. Politico reports that this is part of a push for new government powers as the novel China virus spreads across the country.

The move has concerned many civil liberties advocates and Donald Trump’s critics are now alleging that the president is exploiting the crisis to move forward controversial measures.

The DOJ requests are not expected to go through the Democratic-controlled House. They cover numerous stages of the legal process, “from initial arrest to how cases are processed and investigated.”

In one of the documents, the department recommended that Congress grant the attorney general the authority to ask the chief judge of any district court to halt court proceedings “whenever the district court is fully or partially closed by virtue of any natural disaster, civil disobedience, or other emergency situation.”

Trending: ILHAN’S DISTRICT: 17-Year-Old GOP Volunteer Shot Dead Outside of Gas Station in Minneapolis

The proposal would also give high-ranking judges broad powers to discontinue court proceeding in times of emergencies. It would apply to “any statutes or rules of procedure otherwise affecting pre-arrest, post-arrest, pre-trial, trial, and post-trial procedures in criminal and juvenile proceedings and all civil process and proceedings,” based on the initial legislative language the department shared with Congress. The DOJ contended that individual judges can already halt proceedings during emergencies but that their proposal would guarantee that all judges in a given district could take on emergencies “in a consistent manner.”

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

The request caused unease due to its potential implications for habeas corpus, the constitutional right to appear before a judge after being arrested and then attempt to ask for release.

“Not only would it be a violation of that, but it says ‘affecting pre-arrest,’” commented Norman L. Reimer, executive director of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. “So that means you could be arrested and never brought before a judge until they decide that the emergency or the civil disobedience is over. I find it absolutely terrifying. Especially in a time of emergency, we should be very careful about granting new powers to the government.”

Reimer said the possibility of chief judges nullifying all court rules during an emergency for an indefinite period of time was deeply concerning.

“That is something that should not happen in a democracy,” he remarked.

The department also requested that Congress pause the statute of limitations for criminal investigations and civil proceedings in times of national emergencies, “and for one year following the end of the national emergency,” according to the legislation’s draft.

Politico highlighted another controversial aspect of this request: “The department is looking to change the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure in some cases to expand the use of videoconference hearings and to let some of those hearings happen without defendants’ consent, according to the draft legislative text.:

“Video teleconferencing may be used to conduct an appearance under this rule,” a draft of potential new language for Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 5(f) explaining, deleting the phrase “if the defendant consents.”

Reimer believes that forcing people to go through hearings over video rather than in person would constitute a threat to civil liberties.

“If it were with the consent of the accused person it would be fine,” he state. “But if it’s not with the consent of the accused person, it’s a terrible road to go down. We have a right to public trials. People have a right to be present in court.”

Utah Senator Mike Lee complained about this proposal on Twitter.

He Tweeted, “OVER MY DEAD BODY.”

 

News

Southern Baptist Convention Reverses Course on Name Change After BLP Reporting

They say they’re not changing their name.

Published

on

The Southern Baptist Convention has sought to dispel reporting from Big League Politics on the organization’s planned name change, arguing that the institution isn’t formally changing its name.

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

But a close look at the American Christian church’s plans relating to its name reveal that it’s played with the idea far more seriously than they’re making it seem.

Reports of a name change first emerged in a Washington Post article published on Tuesday. SBC President JD Greear told the Post that “hundreds of churches” affiliated with the denomination had “committed” to using the phrase “Great Commission Baptist” as an alternative to the denomination’s longtime moniker. The change would come as Greear touts his support of the Black Lives Matter, although he’s been careful in pointing out he doesn’t support any formal organization related to the movement. Greear also is renaming the church he personally pastors with the term.

The SBC’s 2021 convention will also organize under the motto of “We Are Great Commission Baptists.” Sounds a lot like a name change, even if the SBC’s leadership is steadfastly maintaining it isn’t.

The name ‘Great Commission Baptist’ is theologically sound in the Christian religion, but it’s somewhat questionable that the organization’s leader appears to be emphasizing it at a moment in which political correctness is making its entryism into many Christian churches and organizations.

It seems as if the organization’s figurehead is keen to present himself as a liberal-style suburban Evangelical to the Washington Post, but he changed his tune quite quickly when the rank and file membership of Southern Baptist churches learned that he was promoting the idea of a name change.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending