Libertarian ping! Click here to get added or here to be removed or post a message here!
View past Libertarian pings here
Posted on 05/17/2010 7:46:23 AM PDT by freedomwarrior998
This morning the Supreme Court handed down its opinion in United States v. Comstock, a challenge to the federal government’s authority to civilly commit a “sexually dangerous” federal prisoner beyond the time of his sentence. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that the federal government lacked such authority within its enumerated powers. The Supreme Court disagreed, voting 7–2 to uphold the federal government’s commitment power under the Necessary & Proper Clause. Justice Breyer wrote for the majority. Justices Kennedy & Alito concurred in the judgment, and Justice Thomas dissented, joined by Justice Scalia. The opinions are here. Some earlier VC posts on the case are here and here. I haven’t had a chance to read the opinions yet, but given that Justice Breyer wrote the majority — and that he is such an avowed advocate of broad federal power — I suspect this decision is a major setback for those seeking to limit the federal government to its constitutionally enumerated powers.
but we the people have the ultimate power if we can ever rise up and take it back...
...the Republic is on life support. There isn’t much time left.
The whole notion is stupid, why don’t the congress just change the sentencing laws and make it “manditory life” for some of these perves. Then it wouldn’t have ended at the SCOTUS.
This is a rare occasion in that Roberts seems to completely have dropped the ball. Very disappointing.
So unless I am misreading this, essentially, anyone the Congress declares a threat to the safety and well-being of the public can be incarcerated indefinitely.
I wonder if they had 'potential domestic terrorists' in mind?
While I am not, would not, and cannot argue for the release of dangerous sex offenders, that should be covered by their sentence, not at the whim of the Congress. For that matter, that should be the case for any offense, and considered by the jury when they hand down a verdict.
I think the point of this is that the federal government doesn’t have the authority to set mandatory sentencing for this crime.
Between the war on some drugs and ‘it’s for the children’....
To continue to hold militia after a judge had ordered them released is because of.....?
To continue to incarcerate offenders (in this case, sex offenders...) because of (XYZ. Insert risk) ...the danger to public safety.....?
Now, to simply reclassify what constitutes risk/danger, as in tying together the DHS memo and present military members, gun holders and Christians, and make them dangers to public safety......?
No, I understand the controversey involves folks who have finished their sentences but they end up at the whim of a judge or a state or federal board being kept indefinitely often because there are no safe places to send them where they might not re-offend or where they won’t be harrassed or rejected by a hostile public.
The congress or state legislatures can by law increase sentencing lengths or direct that the courts not do this without legislative guidance but it appears they would rather pass the buck to the courts to “arbitrarily” do this,
as there is no real public opposition to this sad situation.
The congress can pass measures by 3/4 th’s majorities in both the representive and the senatorial branches directing the federal courts not to take on this role if they so desired and the courts including the Supreme would have to follow...yet the legislative branch has no political desire to do this right now....at least until the courts start using these same legal arguements under the Nand P clause to say..demand political candidates prove their citizenships or to actively remove sitting legislators from power!
The Supremes have overstepped here, over a fairly emotional issue and congess needs to man up and slap the courts back. The courts don’t have the right to keep a man beyond his sentencing timelines, no matter what the crime is...only the legislature can define what those statues are! The sentencing guidelines may need to changed, but the courts should not arbitrarily do this on their own!
This combined with the current talk of limiting free speech (um, “redistributing speech opportunities”) if that speech is harmful to the country, is very bad medicine.
“the Republic is on life support. There isn’t much time left.”
In case you haven’t noticed, the American Republic is as dead as the Roman Republic was after 100 years of wars and revolutions in the First Century B.C.
The next act will see the creation of a dictatorship of either the Right or Left. My guess is this regime will be on the model of the one created by Caesar Augustus with the forms of the old Republic - like the Senate and the Constitution - in place, but the real authority will lay with the “First Citizen” who will rule for life.
Thus America will become an Empire, the overlord of the world in time. Our new leaders will do this because, like freedom of speech, independent countries and peoples outside the orbit of Washington’s control are dangerous and wars too costly.
Of course, the Pax Americana will have its advantages - wealth, trade, industry and the arts will have another Golden Age as will all religions, which to the “First Citizen” are all equally true, equally false and equally useful to the State.
Yes, the New Praetorian Guards will knock you in the head if you speak out against the Emperor, the Empire and the New Order. However, who needs republican nonsense like the First Amendment when the Empire offers everything to everyone?
For the professional soldier - endless peace keeping missions. For the professional politician - state funded election campaigns that lead in steps to membership for life in the Senate. For the businessmen - state loans at low interest rates. For the drug addicted - free drugs including a suicide pill when addiction gets too much. For the lazy - a state pension and free housing for life. For the student - free education including college.
Fill in the blank. Everyone will free to find their own pursuit of happiness. Everyone will be happy. At long last Plato’s Republic will be become reality. The earth will be the best of all possible worlds. This “Pax Americana” - the “Golden Age” may well last far beyond the 200 years of the Roman Peace - It may last 2,000 years, or forever. After all, it will be the perfect political system for mankind built on the wisdom of the Old Age and made into reality by the technology of the New Age.
But you ask: “What about the rebels? What about those identified and knocked on the head by the Praetorian Guard? What if they insist on rebellion against the Empire to the death? Will they be executed? Sent to Siberia for life? Brainwashed into acceptance of the New Order?”
None of the above. Execution is the poorest waste of a human being. Those who rebel against the best of all possible worlds are to be made the colonists of outer space. In time they will push the boundaries of the empire literally to the edge of the universe.
DOUBLEPLUSGOOD, heh?
Liberals are a threat. Liberal militias like Acorn and SEIU must be watched carefully and La Raza along with media matters.
“So unless I am misreading this, essentially, anyone the Congress declares a threat to the safety and well-being of the public can be incarcerated indefinitely.’
It seems that what SCOTUS is saying is that once you have been convicted and incarcerated for a federal crime, you are then under federal juridiction, just as though you lived in DC or served in the armed forces. Then and only then you are subject to federal civil commitment, if a federal judge agrees that you are a danger to yourself or others.
I agree that this is a slippery slope, but I think the alarm expressed here is a bit overdone.
Because they need the legal precedence so that they can incarcerate anyone they want, for as long as they like and claim it’s done legally.
ask King George about the ‘Necessary & Proper’ clause..
The last honest Presidential election may had taken place in 2008.
Interesting, especially considering that Thomas Jefferson considered and openly stated that something as seemingly benign as federal funding for canal construction was unconstitutional as it fell outside of the necessary and proper clause. It just shows how far we’ve fallen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.