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: SANITY: Black Lives Matter Rioter Charged With Attempted Murder After Opening Fire at Motorist Crossing Roadblock

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

RIOTS: Who do you blame for the violence on America's streets?

  • RIOTS: Who do you blame for the violence on America's streets?

  • 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

Free Speech Organization FIRE Defends Kansas State Student Jaden McNeil From a Politically Correct Lynch Mob, KSU Will Not Expel the Student

Published

on

After Kansas State University student Jaden McNeil made a Tweet in jest about George Floyd last week, he came under fire from all angles — athletes, the student body, and university administrators.

Given the tense climate of American political discourse in 2020, there was speculation that he was about to be expelled from the university.

Nevertheless, online activism from the likes of staunch right-winger Michelle Malkin helped create sufficient pushback against the lynch mobs that were descending on McNeil.

Now, McNeil has even more backup with free speech organization The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) coming to his defense.

take our poll - story continues below

RIOTS: Who do you blame for the violence on America's streets?

  • RIOTS: Who do you blame for the violence on America's streets?

  • 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.

FIRE sent KSU a resounding warning:

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education is a non-partisan, non-profit organization dedicated to defending liberty, freedom of speech, due process, academic freedom, legal equality, and freedom of conscience on America’s college campuses.

FIRE appreciates that Kansas State University is one of the few institutions in the country whose policies earn a ‘green light’ rating from FIRE. We write today in response to the University’s statement that it is reviewing its “options” concerning KSU undergraduate Jaden McNeil’s statement on social media.

KSU made a suggestive tweet in response to McNeil’s original tweet about Floyd:

 

A message from President Richard Myers: The insensitive comments posted by one K-State student hurts our entire community. These divisive statements do not represent for the values of our university. We condemn racism and bigotry in all its forms.

We are launching an immediate review of the university’s options. Black Lives Matter at Kansas State University and we will continue to fight for social justice.

Although McNeil was forced to delete his Tweet about George Floyd last week, sites like Revolver still maintained a record of it.

McNeil tweeted jokingly, “Congratulations to George Floyd on being drug free for an entire month!”

FIRE’s letter served as a reminder to KSU that as a public university it is bound by the United States Constitution and is compelled to protect free speech per the First Amendment. Yes, even when it comes to offensive speech.

The letter added:

While McNeil’s tweets may be deeply offensive to many, they do not fall into a category of speech unprotected by the First Amendment, which strictly limits public universities like KSU from punishing protected expression.

The entire statement can be read on Michelle Malkin’s twitter feed:

 

The stakes are high in 2020, as free speech hangs in the balance thanks to relentless pressure from the PC Left and Big Tech.

If the Right loses this battle, all other rights —right to bear arms all the way to the freedom of association — will be ripped to shreds.

The good news is that KSU announced that it will not expel McNeil over his Tweet. But the fight is far from over.

Anyone who values American freedoms should stand in solidarity with McNeil.

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


Trending