Can Hamdi waiver citizenship?
David R. Dow
ddow at uh.edu
Fri Sep 24 08:01:32 PDT 2004
the u.s. creates "stateless" people all the time. he will be annoyed with
me if he learns that i plugged his book, but my brother, mark dow, has
recently published american gulag: inside u.s immigration prisons (u. calif
press, 2004). in it, you can read about quite a few stateless people.
when the ins detains someone whom the country of citizenship won't take
back, the person is not only stateless, but detained indefinitely.
At 05:43 PM 09/23/2004 -0500, Sanford Levinson wrote:
>This certainly seems to set up a classic "unconstitutional conditions"
>problem. How crucial is it, incidentally, that Hamdi has a place to go
>to (that apparently will accept him)? Could the US in effect create a
>"stateless" person?
>
>sandy
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: conlawprof-bounces at lists.ucla.edu
>[mailto:conlawprof-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Jason Mazzone
>Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 5:35 PM
>To: conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
>Subject: Can Hamdi waiver citizenship?
>
>A condition of Yaser Esam Hamdi's release from the brig in Charleston is
>that he renounce his U.S. citizenship. From news reports, Hamdi is
>apparently not troubled by this condition. But is citizenship,
>guaranteed under the Fourteenth Amendment, subject to waiver through a
>deal with the government? If indeed citizenship can generally be waived
>(plea bargaining comes to mind) how about in this kind of case, as a
>condition for the release of somebody who has never even been
>prosecuted? And can individuals held as enemy combattants be required to
>give up other constitutional protections (speech, religion, for example)
>if they want to be set free?
>
>
>Jason Mazzone
>Assistant Professor of Law
>Brooklyn Law School
>250 Joralmeon Street
>Brooklyn, NY 11201
>(718) 780-7514 (voice)
>(718) 780-0394 (fax)
>
>> On October 20. Canada votes to accept the U.S. offer. On November
>> 2nd (or whatever the relevant date), Canadians vote overwhelming for
>> John Kerry. Do these votes count? How many electoral votes? Who
>decides?
>>
>>>>> "Matthew J. Franck" <mfranck at radford.edu> 09/23/04 11:46 AM >>>
>> I haven't read the article yet, though I look forward to it. My
>> question is, if there is continuity from the Articles to the
>> Constitution, is the
>>
>> offer still open for Canada to become the (now) 51st state? Or was
>> that
>>
>> foreclosed by the Constitution's failure to mention it?
>>
>> Matt
>> ***************************
>> Matthew J. Franck
>> Professor and Chairman
>> Department of Political Science
>> Radford University
>> P.O. Box 6945
>> Radford, VA 24142-6945
>> phone 540-831-5854
>> fax 540-831-6075
>> e-mail <mailto:mfranck at radford.edu>mfranck at radford.edu
>> www.radford.edu/~mfranck
>> ***************************
>> At 07:08 PM 9/22/2004, Calvin Johnson wrote:
>>> I invite critique and controversy in reaction to my "Homage
>>> to
>>
>>> Clio: The Continuity from the Articles of Confederation into the
>>> Constitution," 20 Constitutional Commentary 463 (2004), which can be
>>> reached at
>>> http://www.utexas.edu/law/faculty/calvinjohnson/HomageToClio.pdf
>>> I would of course send the reprint to you all, personally, if only I
>
>>> could afford it.
>>> My best
>>> Calvin Johnson
>>> Abstract: The nature of the United States continued
>> even
>>> as the Articles of Confederation was replaced by the Constitution.
>> The
>>> Constitution is a radical document, but unstated assumptions about
>>> political institutions continued from the Articles into the
>>> Constitution. Only the provisions that were challenged or changed
>> were
>>> written down. Routine parts of what the Framers knew defied
>> articulation.
>>> Historical continuity explains why George Washington
>>> could be President, even though Virginia had not ratified the
>>> Constitution either when he was born or when the Constitution was
>>> adopted. The United States was the same United States before and
>> after
>>> ratification.
>>> Historical continuity implies that the ban in the
>>> Articles of Confederation on state discrimination against
>>> out-of-state
>>
>>> citizens by taxation or regulation is part of the Constitution,
>> although
>>> not stated. The norm was strongly felt, but unchallenged and so not
>>> written down in the Constitution.
>>> Historical continuity implies that Congress may
>>> commandeer state officers as it did under the Articles. Tax
>> requisitions
>>> were a commandeering of state officers for federal benefit under the
>>> Articles. The Framers assumed that requisitions of tax and similar
>>> commandeering would continue under the Constitution.
>>> Finally, historical continuity implies that Congress
>> has
>>> the general power to adopt all appropriate measures "for the common
>>> Defence and general Welfare." The debaters assumed that federal
>> powers
>>> would be legitimate even though they were not enumerated so long as
>> the
>>> powers fell appropriately within the national sphere. They removed
>> the
>>> requirement in the Articles of Confederation that Congress have only
>> the
>>> powers "expressly delegated" to it, and they defended that removal
>>> through the adoption of the Tenth Amendment
>>>
>>>
>>>Calvin H. Johnson
>>>Andrews & Kurth Centennial Professor of Law The University of Texas
>>>School of Law
>>>727 E. Dean Keeton (26th) St.
>>>Austin, TX 78705
>>>(512) 232-1306 (voice)
>>>FAX: (512) 232-2399
>>>Website: http://www.utexas.edu/law/faculty/calvinjohnson/cv.pdf
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu To subscribe,
>>>unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
>>>http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof
>>>
>>>Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as
>>>private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are
>>>posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can
>>>(rightly
>> or
>>>wrongly) forward the messages to others.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu To subscribe,
>> unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
>> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof
>>
>> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as
>> private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are
>> posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can
>> (rightly or
>> wrongly) forward the messages to others.
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu To subscribe,
>unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
>http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof
>
>Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as
>private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are
>posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly
>or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
>_______________________________________________
>To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
>To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof
>
>Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as
private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are
posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or
wrongly) forward the messages to others.
>
David R. Dow
Distinguished University Professor
University of Houston Law Center
100 Law Center
Houston, Texas 77204-6060
713-743-2171 (direct dial)
713-743-2131 (facsimile)
ddow at uh.edu
www.davidrdow.com
More information about the Conlawprof
mailing list