(CNN) - The surviving suspect in last week's Boston Marathon bombings, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, "will not be treated as an enemy combatant," but rather will be prosecuted "through our civilian system of justice," White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters Monday afternoon.
"Under U.S. law, United States citizens cannot be tried in military commissions," he said.
As it should be...
This young man is a U.S. citizen who committed a terrorist attack on U.S. soil. He wasn't on a battlefield. He should be labelled as an enemy combatant ONLY for the purposes of not being mirandized. However, he should be tried in federal court.
So why didn't he get Miranda Rights? I swear... The Government really knows how to screw stuff up royally.
If only Obama had him in his drone cross-hairs...
So....by using liberal logic (oxymoron)... if guns caused the theather shooting in Colorado and school shooting in Newtown Ct, then Jay-Z caused the Boston Bombing. "After killing 3 and wounding 180, the surviving brother tweets, 'Ain’t no love in the heart of the city,” a line from rapper Jay-Z."
"Under U.S. law, United States citizens cannot be tried in military commissions," -Jay Carney. No duh! yah think!
Citizen? Well, OK. The charge is "Treason" or rather, "High Treason"..... or don't we charge that anymore?
But they can be killed by a drone. What is going on with these people, has everyone lost their minds??
Shocker! Im surprised this administration is actually adhering to the constitution! Considering they believe it is ok to give kill orders on American citizens without a trial!
H'mmm...Dzhokhar became an American citizen on September 11, 2012, if news reports are correct. That's just seven months ago. Why not try him for treason? When someone takes the oath of citizenship, they renounce foreign entities and swear to be loyal US citizens. The Boston Bomber must have had his fingers crossed when he took the oath. The real issues are that he didn't have a license to buy a pressure cooker, and that no one read him his Miranda Rights.
This is why granting citizenship to someone is a BIG deal and should not be done carelessly. There must be safeguards in order to prevent foreign terrorists from gaining citizenship. As an aside, cannot citizenship be rescinded for good cause in this case?
why was there uncertainty of this happening in the first place? this is the proper way to do things. If there was ever a doubt he wasn't going to be treated as a US citizen, we're in for some trouble
I have faith in the system.
They are beginning exercises against us and want to take a no fault run at this kid in the courts. Call it a dry high profile run. Call it one dead and one serving "Life" as we will easily accept bits of "confidential" info in trade for his life. We will be entertained for years to come with in-depth interviews about: his childhood, a brothers influence, why he felt lonely in a new land, or something more amazing like his first love and where she is now. "The American Life; How it could have been"
Brilliant, encourage every terrorist plotting against us to mail in a citizenship form prior to their attack so they can get their free lawyer and media circus.
I'm still waiting to see how the administration is going to "forget" everything they learned prior to this guys Miranda rights being restored. Its not exactly like you can reattach a fruit plucked off a poisonous tree so unless the administrations new terrorist strategy is to aim for a mistrial they better start looking for a plan B.
FACT: treating this kid as an "enemy combatant" would be a win for those who would do these things and serves their goals of doing them in the first place. Arguing otherwise is an argument for RETREAT and gives them what they want...wholesale abandonment of all our core principles regarding justice and our faith in our own judicial system and government to see it meted out. Once that is accomplished, nobody perceives justice in ANY act of our government. You play into their hands by succumbing to your fear.
I will not retreat. You cannot profess to believe in this country and its laws and institutions and simultaneously argue that this kid is an "enemy combatant" who should not be tried under Act III. They are mutually exclusive.
Good. Leave these decisions in the hands of PROFESSIONAL, practicing prosecuting attorneys and not self-important politicians chiming in on things that are "outide of their swim lane".
As a result of 9-11, Americans sat idlely by and let the prior administration [#43] trample on their rights of privacy and due process as secure by the FOURTH AMMENDMENT of the US Constitution. By prosecuting this Bostan perp in criminal court, the Obama Administration is saying that America`s principles don`t need to be rejected just to capture, convict and/ or kill a cowardly bomber.
I believe America is stronger in the court of world opinion when it takes down the bad guys WITHOUT bending its well established rules.
Correct decision. Howl at the moon all you want. We are a country of laws, not convenient exercises of power. You either believe in them, in our justice system and the rights we afford those who are born or become our citizens or you've abandoned all of it. Guess which one terrorists are trying to get us to do when they commit these acts.
A president who doesn't realize what is going oon is a bigger threat to this country and our freedom than all the terrrorists.
"This is why granting citizenship to someone is a BIG deal and should not be done carelessly. There must be safeguards in order to prevent foreign terrorists from gaining citizenship"
How ridiculous do you tuly have to be to think that the case of a boy who immigrated here as a refugee as a 10 year old somehow constitutes a great example of "why we need to be careful"?
The Obama administration honoring the rule of law, how refreshing to see this administration practice what it preaches throughout the world.
BTW, where in the US is this guy supposed to find a fair trial complete with unbiased jury of his peers?
Our judicial system is appropriate. However, Mass laws do not allow the potential for a death penalty ruling. I think the death penalty should be used only of absolute guilt of the most severe crimes. However, ANYONE knowingly, and willingly place bombs in public places and looking directly at children in the area while placing the bombs deserve such punishment, if found guilty. There are crimes that are so horrendous that the guilty truly deserve the death penalty. This is one of those crimes.