Another Constitutional Question

[Steve Bartman]

Rep. Michele Bachman, R-MN, is advocating for Congress to "prevent"
the prosecution of the Gitmo detainees in NYC in federal court.

My question:: Isn't this a separation of powers issue where Congress
does not have a role? Prosecution is an executive function which
interfaces with the judicial branch. Congress can vote joint
resolutions, sense of the Senate, etc., but do they have the valid
constitutional power to prevent such trials through legislation?
(Presumably a law passed over President Obama's veto.) I understand
that Congress can place certain classes of matters outside the
cognizance of the judicial branch, but in this case she is not
speaking of a general class of crime. She is speaking specifically
about these trials alone.

Anyway, I know there's a lot of constitutional expertise here, and the
last time I asked a question like this the answers quickly went off
into areas I had not considered. Outside of the political grand
standing (which she excels at), is there any value in her position?

Steve

[Timothy]

On Dec 22, 3:01�pm, Steve Bartman <sbart...@visi.com> wrote:
> Rep. Michele Bachman, R-MN, is advocating for Congress to "prevent"
> the prosecution of the Gitmo detainees in NYC in federal court.
>
> My question:: Isn't this a separation of powers issue where Congress
> does not have a role?

I think so... but there's an even simpler problem. Article I, Section
9, paragraph 3 says: "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law will
be passed."

Bachman's bill, which mandates the incarceration of certain detainees,
is a bill of attainder.

[D.F. Manno]

In article <8092j55ram40f0ja5...@4ax.com>,
Steve Bartman <sbar...@visi.com> wrote:

> Rep. Michele Bachman, R-MN, is advocating for Congress to "prevent"
> the prosecution of the Gitmo detainees in NYC in federal court.
>
> My question:: Isn't this a separation of powers issue where Congress
> does not have a role?

Article III, Section 1: "In all cases affecting ambassadors, other
public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party,
the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other
cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate
jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under
such regulations as the Congress shall make."

--
D.F. Manno | dfm...@mail.com
And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would
have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His
existence. (Bertrand Russell)