I’ll have to revisit those posts. At the time I interpreted those posts as meaning that the crimes would be connected to acts of treason, which would cause the jurisdiction to change from criminal courts to military courts.
Essential Questions
• Does the Constitution require the direct use of force and presence at the site of an act of war for conviction on charges of treason, or is it sufficient for conviction that a defendant is “constructively present” where the act took place, by playing a key role in organizing and supporting the act of treason?
• When are federal judges required to follow precedents established by earlier Supreme Court decisions? Does every part of a Supreme Court decision have equal weight or authority?
• Why did the framers include in the Constitution restrictions on the prosecution and conviction of defendants accused of treason? How did these limits on treason prosecutions differ from the criteria for treason convictions in Great Britain or the American colonies?