The Constitution in Plain English - Part 5 of 10
Halfway through the Bill of Rights, it has become plain that if the Constitution is written in plain English, judges and justices who don't like what it says have obfuscated our rights down the toilet, and a long time ago. But let's slog through the exercise just for the halibut.
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 offence 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.
Notice the first two words are "no person," not "no citizen." These words apply to anyone who appears as a defendant in U.S. courts, not just any U.S. citizen who's arrested. You can't say the rules of U.S. law don't apply to illegal immigrants or not-POW "enemy combatants," because this Amendment doesn't allow for exceptions (except "except in cases arising in the land or naval forces ... in time of war or public danger"). Argue otherwise and you risk having a cliche in your face: "What part of 'no' don't you understand?"
You can't hold a suspect unless a grand jury has reviewed the evidence and issued an indictment. This is not because the Founders liked bad guys; it is because they didn't trust the tyrannical government whose shackles they had recently broken. They perceived that one day some American tyrant might deign to hold an innocent person for the "infamous crime" of, say, criticizing the U.S. government, and so they emphasized that you need to convince a jury that a real crime was committed.
This is one of the plainest amendments - they seem to get even plainer as we go along, until the 10th Amendment is plain as the nose on your face (oops, getting ahead of myself there) - but the obfuscators have had a field day with it.
You can't be put on trial twice for the same offense, but somehow O.J. Simpson and other alleged murderers have found themselves subject to a "wrongful death" lawsuit even if they've been found innocent of the death, and "sexual predators" have been found to be a special breed of evil people who can and should be held in prison after their terms have expired - not for any crime they have committed, but for the crimes they "might" commit.
You can't be compelled to testify against yourself - "You have the right to remain silent" - but we have seen so many fictional bad guys invoke this right that we "know" the only reason to remain silent is to hide your crime.
You can't be deprived of life, liberty and property without due process of law - but the obfuscators have seized cash, cars and houses from suspects in drug cases on grounds they were "illegally obtained," even though the crime has not yet been proven in court. Japanese-Americans were tossed into detention camps after Pearl Harbor, and "enemy combatants" (who are "not prisoners of war") are being held in detention camps today, and the USAPATRIOT Act allows for "terrorists" to be held indefinitely without being charged.
And they can't take your property for public uses without just compensation - but now, this year, we learn that every use of property is public. In the infamous New Haven, Conn., case, the government can take your land (err, that is, buy your land) if someone of greater means can improve the property and bring in higher tax revenues. Yes, your property has a public use: The "public" uses it to raise tax dollars - and if MegaCondos Inc. or BigBox Stores can make better use of it, the government can seize it from you and give it to them.
A guy at a now-defunct Midwest newspaper recently wrote that the U.S. Constitution effectively doesn't apply anymore, that we basically have a new Constitution that says "all lives and property belong to the president, Congress and courts, which can do anything they damn well please with them." At the halfway point of these ruminations about whether the Bill of Rights means what it says, it's hard to deny that reality. (That guy's column is now off-line; I should see if I have a copy of it around here somewhere.)
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 offence 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.
Notice the first two words are "no person," not "no citizen." These words apply to anyone who appears as a defendant in U.S. courts, not just any U.S. citizen who's arrested. You can't say the rules of U.S. law don't apply to illegal immigrants or not-POW "enemy combatants," because this Amendment doesn't allow for exceptions (except "except in cases arising in the land or naval forces ... in time of war or public danger"). Argue otherwise and you risk having a cliche in your face: "What part of 'no' don't you understand?"
You can't hold a suspect unless a grand jury has reviewed the evidence and issued an indictment. This is not because the Founders liked bad guys; it is because they didn't trust the tyrannical government whose shackles they had recently broken. They perceived that one day some American tyrant might deign to hold an innocent person for the "infamous crime" of, say, criticizing the U.S. government, and so they emphasized that you need to convince a jury that a real crime was committed.
This is one of the plainest amendments - they seem to get even plainer as we go along, until the 10th Amendment is plain as the nose on your face (oops, getting ahead of myself there) - but the obfuscators have had a field day with it.
You can't be put on trial twice for the same offense, but somehow O.J. Simpson and other alleged murderers have found themselves subject to a "wrongful death" lawsuit even if they've been found innocent of the death, and "sexual predators" have been found to be a special breed of evil people who can and should be held in prison after their terms have expired - not for any crime they have committed, but for the crimes they "might" commit.
You can't be compelled to testify against yourself - "You have the right to remain silent" - but we have seen so many fictional bad guys invoke this right that we "know" the only reason to remain silent is to hide your crime.
You can't be deprived of life, liberty and property without due process of law - but the obfuscators have seized cash, cars and houses from suspects in drug cases on grounds they were "illegally obtained," even though the crime has not yet been proven in court. Japanese-Americans were tossed into detention camps after Pearl Harbor, and "enemy combatants" (who are "not prisoners of war") are being held in detention camps today, and the USAPATRIOT Act allows for "terrorists" to be held indefinitely without being charged.
And they can't take your property for public uses without just compensation - but now, this year, we learn that every use of property is public. In the infamous New Haven, Conn., case, the government can take your land (err, that is, buy your land) if someone of greater means can improve the property and bring in higher tax revenues. Yes, your property has a public use: The "public" uses it to raise tax dollars - and if MegaCondos Inc. or BigBox Stores can make better use of it, the government can seize it from you and give it to them.
A guy at a now-defunct Midwest newspaper recently wrote that the U.S. Constitution effectively doesn't apply anymore, that we basically have a new Constitution that says "all lives and property belong to the president, Congress and courts, which can do anything they damn well please with them." At the halfway point of these ruminations about whether the Bill of Rights means what it says, it's hard to deny that reality. (That guy's column is now off-line; I should see if I have a copy of it around here somewhere.)
posted by B.W. Richardson at
8:08 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home