quote:I don't think there are technical grounds to bar someone like that from the U.S., necessarily. But couldn't she be tried for treason or war crimes?
I hate to say it, but I agree with Trump on this
--------------------------------
Life is short. Play with your dog.
quote:Originally posted by QuirtEvans:quote:I don't think there are technical grounds to bar someone like that from the U.S., necessarily. But couldn't she be tried for treason or war crimes?
I hate to say it, but I agree with Trump on this
1. Those are two completely inconsistent statements. In the first, you say that there are no technical grounds to bar her. But then you say you agree with Trump about barring her.
2. She agrees that she can be tried for treason. She just wants to come back for her child’s sake.
3. Her situation is sui generis (I hope I have the Latin right). She was born here, but her parent was a diplomat, so the law (but perhaps not the Constitution?) says she’s not entitled to citizenship. But yet, she was issued a passport, and only a citizen can hold a U.S. passport. The State Department’s argument seems to be “oops, we screwed up, but she doesn’t have a valid passport NOW”.
4. Assuming she’s a citizen, they can’t bar her from entry, can they? Regardless of any crime she may have committed? She can still be tried for the crime, but are there any legal grounds to keep a citizen out of the country?
5. Can you revoke someone’s citizenship if they shouldn’t have been granted citizenship in the first place?
All in all, a great law school exam question.
quote:Originally posted by QuirtEvans:quote:I don't think there are technical grounds to bar someone like that from the U.S., necessarily. But couldn't she be tried for treason or war crimes?
I hate to say it, but I agree with Trump on this
1. Those are two completely inconsistent statements. In the first, you say that there are no technical grounds to bar her. But then you say you agree with Trump about barring her.
quote:Originally posted by Steve Miller:
Doesn’t a charge of treason require that the country is at war?
Asking for a friend.
quote:Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of Two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or in Confession in open Court.
quote:Originally posted by Cindysphinx:quote:Originally posted by QuirtEvans:quote:I don't think there are technical grounds to bar someone like that from the U.S., necessarily. But couldn't she be tried for treason or war crimes?
I hate to say it, but I agree with Trump on this
1. Those are two completely inconsistent statements. In the first, you say that there are no technical grounds to bar her. But then you say you agree with Trump about barring her.
My statements are consistent. I don't know if there are technical grounds to bar her. But if not, I think she should be tried for treason or war crimes if she returns.
quote:Under the Patriot Act in the wake of 9/11, we tried people for giving money to terrorist organizations. Surely it is a crime to fly over and work on the ground in aid of a terrorist organization. Even if she did not personally behead anyone, she was part of a conspiracy to commit heinous acts all over the world.
If they can find a technicality to declare her not a citizen, go for it. As for her child . . . maybe the kid can come back without her. How old is this kid, anyway?
quote:Originally posted by Piano*Dad:
In the Constitution:
quote:Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of Two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or in Confession in open Court.
It says nothing about formal declarations of war passed by Congress. If you war on the US, you are guilty. ISIS was killing our citizens, and she was adhering to our enemies.
The real question, it seems, is whether she was a citizen. You can't be tried for treason if you are not a citizen. But you can be kept out.
quote:Originally posted by QuirtEvans:quote:Originally posted by Cindysphinx:quote:Originally posted by QuirtEvans:quote:I don't think there are technical grounds to bar someone like that from the U.S., necessarily. But couldn't she be tried for treason or war crimes?
I hate to say it, but I agree with Trump on this
1. Those are two completely inconsistent statements. In the first, you say that there are no technical grounds to bar her. But then you say you agree with Trump about barring her.
My statements are consistent. I don't know if there are technical grounds to bar her. But if not, I think she should be tried for treason or war crimes if she returns.
Please don't try to reformulate your statement to say that what you said was consistent. It plainly wasn't. You said you agreed with Trump about banning her. I'm glad that you've realized it, and that you are now saying things that are in fact consistent, but I wish you'd simply acknowledge your error instead of trying to rewrite history to pretend you never said the inconsistent thing in the first place.quote:Under the Patriot Act in the wake of 9/11, we tried people for giving money to terrorist organizations. Surely it is a crime to fly over and work on the ground in aid of a terrorist organization. Even if she did not personally behead anyone, she was part of a conspiracy to commit heinous acts all over the world.
If they can find a technicality to declare her not a citizen, go for it. As for her child . . . maybe the kid can come back without her. How old is this kid, anyway?
I don't really know what she did or didn't do. But, conceptually, I don't have a problem with any of that.
quote:Originally posted by Cindysphinx:quote:Originally posted by QuirtEvans:quote:Originally posted by Cindysphinx:quote:Originally posted by QuirtEvans:quote:I don't think there are technical grounds to bar someone like that from the U.S., necessarily. But couldn't she be tried for treason or war crimes?
I hate to say it, but I agree with Trump on this
1. Those are two completely inconsistent statements. In the first, you say that there are no technical grounds to bar her. But then you say you agree with Trump about barring her.
My statements are consistent. I don't know if there are technical grounds to bar her. But if not, I think she should be tried for treason or war crimes if she returns.
Please don't try to reformulate your statement to say that what you said was consistent. It plainly wasn't. You said you agreed with Trump about banning her. I'm glad that you've realized it, and that you are now saying things that are in fact consistent, but I wish you'd simply acknowledge your error instead of trying to rewrite history to pretend you never said the inconsistent thing in the first place.quote:Under the Patriot Act in the wake of 9/11, we tried people for giving money to terrorist organizations. Surely it is a crime to fly over and work on the ground in aid of a terrorist organization. Even if she did not personally behead anyone, she was part of a conspiracy to commit heinous acts all over the world.
If they can find a technicality to declare her not a citizen, go for it. As for her child . . . maybe the kid can come back without her. How old is this kid, anyway?
I don't really know what she did or didn't do. But, conceptually, I don't have a problem with any of that.
Sorry you misunderstood me so completely.
quote:I don't think there are technical grounds to bar someone like that from the U.S., necessarily.
* * * *
I agree with Trump on this. Banning an entire group of people because of their being Muslim is wrong. But banning someone for something they actually did -- supporting an enemy of the U.S. -- is something else entirely different.