Democrats Against Military Tribunals?

Dennis Putnam dap1 at MINDSPRING.COM
Sat Dec 1 17:40:21 MST 2001


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

At 08:00 AM 12/1/2001 -0800, you wrote:

>In the restricted sense the definition claims that.  In the general it does
>not.  Again, the drafters were very brilliant men.  I believe they chose
>their words very carefully, and I believe if they meant citizen, they would
>have said so.  Your previous post alluded to four varying degrees of
>"people".  here you claim the word is synonymous with citizen.

What you and I believe is irrelevant. It is what the SCOTUS believes that
matters and that was my point.

I don't claim that, Black's does and thus that is what the SCOTUS uses
unless there is some other intent documented by the debates, Federalist
Papers or other writings of the founders. To my knowledge they never really
addressed this issue as apparently it seemed obvious to them at the time
and thus unnecessary to debate it much. The point I was making, in response
to the original question (does the constitution apply to only citizens or
all people?) is that it fully applies ONLY to citizens. However, the SCOTUS
has determined that some parts also apply to non-citizens but not all.



- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dennis Putnam           Public Key can be obtained from:
Loganville, Ga.         <http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Estates/8573>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBPAl4dMwfv3uipHMVEQKcqQCeNq8/4OnIXR8SKAZe/iXoFloIa+gAoOvc
fG1fxxvXihAovNPNnu+ybdyd
=kqCm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



More information about the Rushtalk mailing list