re: #257 sandbox

Why extend “rule of law” provisions to enemy combatants? BTW this is quite unpopular with the US public. They don’t want enemy combatants to get civilian trials. The public is right.

enemy combatants is a subjective term. And do you have a poll to support your claim?

And to answer your question: Because we always have (see for example the shoe bomber under George Bush) and we’re none the less well off for it.

And the rule of law is in the constitution. Nowhere in the constitution does it say that non-citizens arrested within the US are excluded from the Bill of Rights.

But yeah, except for historical examples of the process working, and it being included in the document that gives us our identity as Americans, I can’t think of any other reasons.