5th Ammendment and Al-Alwaki Question

[NathandWarren]

Because I'm a masochist, I sometimes check out blogs of other political persuasions, Left and Right. The Right's response to Al Alwaki's assassination seems to be simply "He was a terrorist so he didn't have rights." This is obviously bs and would be laughable if it wasn't so sad.

In a way, however, the Left's response (namely on Daily Kos) is even more troublesome. Some are pointing to the *5th Amendment* (of all places) to justify the killing.

This is how:

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation"

This is an old trick that reminds me of anti-second amendment rhetoric. However, I want to get everyone's input, and better yet, a good way to combat this way of thinking.

 

[RonPaulCult]

I'm hardly an expert of the law, but the clause that you are referencing seems to be an exception to HOLDING somebody, and later when it mentions that you can't take somebody's life without due process, I see no such exception.

 

[ZanZibar]

"except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger"

basically that means that the person can be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, without due process of law IF they are active in the military during war or some sort of public danger.

It only applies to people who are serving in the US armed forces.

 

[Feeding the Abscess]

6th Amendment applies as well.

 

[Dr.3D]

"Of course not, and there's no way it will stand up in court." that is if it ever goes before the court.

 

[MJU1983]

6th Amendment applies as well.

14th amendment, section 1 too.

 

[ZanZibar]

14th amendment, section 1 too.

14th Amendment wasn't ratified properly.

 

[NaturalMystic]

What would the Hannitys and Rushs say if this was to happen to a believed terrorist in this country. What would they say if we used a predator drone to blow up a house and accidently killed their innocent neighbor at the same time. Their arguments are simple to combat. Didnt Sean get one of those pocket constitutions from the Heritage foundation? he should try reading it.

 

[mrsat_98]

14th Amendment wasn't ratified properly.

Tell the judge.