Gonzales: There is no express grant of habeas corpus in the Constitution
Alberto Gonzales: Again, there is no express grant of habeas in the Constitution. There is a prohibition against taking it away. But it’s never been the case, and I’m not a Supreme –
Arlen Specter: Now, wait a minute. Wait a minute. The constitution says you can’t take it away, except in the case of rebellion or invasion. Doesn’t that mean you have the right of habeas corpus, unless there is an invasion or rebellion?
Alberto Gonzales: I meant by that comment, the Constitution doesn’t say, “Every individual in the United States or every citizen is hereby granted or assured the right to habeas.” It doesn’t say that.
Technically, he is right. It doesn’t expressly grant the right of habeas corpus. It prohibits the removal of it (except during invasion or rebellion), implying that the right is normally retained. But it is a minor matter of wording. It doesn’t change the fact that habeas corpus is a guaranteed constitutional right. On the surface, this just makes Gonzales petty and argumentative. But I think it actually represents something worse: a disdain for restrictions on government power, and a completely backwards conception of the Constitution.
Consider the 9th Amendment:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Quoth James Madison:
It has been objected also against a bill of rights, that, by enumerating particular exceptions to the grant of power, it would disparage those rights which were not placed in that enumeration; and it might follow by implication, that those rights which were not singled out, were intended to be assigned into the hands of the General Government, and were consequently insecure.
Clever souls, our founding fathers anticipated that authoritarian assholes like Alberto Gonzales would come along one day and say “wait a second, it doesn’t say that the people have [some right]” and then proceed to take that right away. They covered that base with the 9th Amendment.
Of all the power-hungry goons in the Bush Administration who stand in opposition to the principles that define America, there is none so odious as Alberto Gonzales. I’ll cheer his exit most of all.
when I saw this on tv i laughed so hard. then i wanted to cry.
Aye… it wasn’t long before he went from “pedantic tool” to “the reason for the 2nd Amendment” in my mind.
Rarely do I ever make the political post, but I was so incensed when I read this that I wanted to make an entry about this. I think of all the posts I have read in response to this though that Mark over at Tempus Fugit makes the most pointed and accurate assessment I’ve seen. The gall with which people are re-interpreting the Constitution is astounding. All rights not expressly given to the government (federal and state) are retained by the people. They don’
Amendment X – Powers of the States and People. Ratified 12/15/1791. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. Now, go read these: http://txfx.net/2007/01/24/gonzales-there-is-no-express-grant-of-habeas-corpus-in-the-constitution/
Ask Al Gonzales his stance on the 2nd Amendment if you want to be made nervous.
[...] From txfx.net… [...]
The underlying problem here is the human tendency to make excuses for things we know are wrong. This is otherwise known as lying to ones self. Lying to others is bad enough, but when we lie to ourselves, we tend to believe it.
Willful ignorance and self-justification play large parts here. So does cowardice, in this case, the fear that one won’t be able to achieve right results by using right methods, so let’s just use foul methods and the end will justify the means.
Examples:
“Why should we need “due process” when two cops, both fine, upstanding citizens, just witnessed that nasty man knife a sweet old lady?”
“That rotten SOB is a criminal. Why should he have any rights?”
“Why tell him what he’s accused of. He already knows what he did!”
“Why should she be informed of the nature of the charges against her, or be allowed to know which or our good citizens is her accuser? And why should we even give her the court rules? What a waste of paper!”
“Everybody knows she’s a prostitute, let her prove she isn’t! Besides, those two cops both saw her talking to a well-dressed man who has no business in her run-down neighborhood. Right there on the public sidewalk, for chrissakes!”
Who hasn’t heard similar from certain of our friends and neighbors?
It’s said that such people cannot be reasoned with, but there is one strategy that may prove useful for making them think:
“Everybody knows you are a child molester. OK, boys, take this slime ball out back and string him up!”
Resolved: wilful ignorance is the only real “sin.”