Victor Hansen

Ground Rules

  • Comments
    We welcome comments, whether favorable or critical, but we will edit or delete comments that are offensive, obnoxious, lacking in reasoning, or spam.
  • No Legal Advice
    Nothing that we write should be construed as legal advice, and under no circumstances should you expect that an attorney-client relationship exists between you and us.
  • Personal Views
    The views expressed in any individual blog post belong to the particular author, and should not be imputed to any other author, Wake Forest University, the University of Iowa, or the University of Miami.

« The Hamdan Verdict - A Government Stroke of Fortune? | Main | United States v. Siddiqui: Was She Almost the First Female Detainee at GTMO? »

August 06, 2008

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b3a569e200e553d279ed8833

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Hamdan, Material Support, and the Ex Post Facto Issue:

Comments

Anderson

"courts must defer to Congress insofar as it concludes that material support was a war crime at the time of Hamdan’s conduct"

That does not seem a persuasive conclusion for Judge Allred to've reached, since deference to Congress makes it very difficult to enforce the Ex Post Facto Clause *against* Congress.

KGH

Allred was looking for law in all the wrong places. He should have Googled Salem and McCarthy. The rationale never changes and it is never seriously questioned until ex post facto - except, of course, by other witches (and familiars), communists(and sympathizers) and terrorists (and material supporters).

The comments to this entry are closed.