4 ms·

Well they should be accepted into US then.

by FpUser 4y ago

SllX 4y ago
Back under the Obama Administration they tried exactly that. It didn't pan out as no State wanted them and no Senator wanted to be the one to tell their constituents "we'll accept terrorists in our borders" Federal prison system or not. Here's the current list if you want to dig deeper into it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_detainees_at_Guantanamo_Bay https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_detainees_at_G...
- kelseyfrog 4y ago
  There is an interesting workaround in housing them at the District of Columbia Jail. The DC Jail being located outside of any state, wouldn't have the problem of the state or senators being held accountable by constituents as DC isn't a state nor does it have any senators.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - SllX 4y ago
    Technically true but you’re forgetting about the 4 Senators from Virginia and Maryland and the DC government that Congress has setup. They might not be directly answerable to DC residents but they’re sure as hell answerable to the people that live around DC and they still have to work in the same city as DC residents live. Less political power doesn’t mean zero political power.
    - kelseyfrog 4y ago
      I feel like I have something to learn, but the equivalent would be as if the CT and MA senators were upset if RI decided to house the prisoners? (ignoring the politics inside RI completely)
      - SllX 4y ago
        If Rhode Island were offering to hold them in its own State prison system, MA & CT wouldn’t have a say in the holding of prisoners, although they could maybe make the transfer messy. DC is not a separate sovereign from the Federal government, the DC government exists as an administrative convenience for Congress in the guise of self-government; which is to say the interests of DC and the White House are legally subordinate to the interests of the Senators and Representatives of the 50 States. The Federal Prison system like all aspects of the Federal government are subject to Senatorial review and while technically you only need enough votes, not necessarily the home Senators approval, the Senate does like to remain collegial and so there’s some things they don’t do unto each other when there’s a Presidential agenda to hold up instead, like at the time: Obama’s. Every Federal penitentiary is in some Senator’s State, and given how controversial it was to put militant combatants anywhere near, let alone through the United States criminal justice system, it’s not happening. Technically, if Congress wanted to house foreign terrorists in the DC city jail, there wouldn’t be anything that could legally hold up an Act of Congress to do so. They’re not motivated nor interested enough to do so, and a city jail isn’t the best place when there’s a Federal Supermax over in Colorado and Guantanamo Bay over in Cuba. It’s not that legally we can’t, it’s just whatever political benefits there are to it are outweighed by political risks to individual members of Congress. The prisoner population of Gitmo is a problem nobody wants, and keeping them there is as good a reason as any to maintain sovereignty in the area in the face of a hostile foreign government.
pavlov 4y ago
They can’t because Republican Congress during Obama’s presidency passed a law to prevent this.
- throw0101c 4y ago
  * https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/dec/20/joe-biden/congress-put-roadblocks-front-efforts-close-gitmo-/ https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/dec/20/joe-biden/... * https://theintercept.com/2015/11/10/congress-overwhelmingly-votes-to-block-guantanamo-closure/ https://theintercept.com/2015/11/10/congress-overwhelmingly-...

Well they should be accepted into US then.

by FpUser 4y ago

Well they should be accepted into US then.

SllX 4y ago

Back under the Obama Administration they tried exactly that. It didn't pan out as no State wanted them and no Senator wanted to be the one to tell their constituents "we'll accept terrorists in our borders" Federal prison system or not. Here's the current list if you want to dig deeper into it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_detainees_at_Guantanamo_Bay https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_detainees_at_G...

kelseyfrog 4y ago
There is an interesting workaround in housing them at the District of Columbia Jail. The DC Jail being located outside of any state, wouldn't have the problem of the state or senators being held accountable by constituents as DC isn't a state nor does it have any senators.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- SllX 4y ago
  Technically true but you’re forgetting about the 4 Senators from Virginia and Maryland and the DC government that Congress has setup. They might not be directly answerable to DC residents but they’re sure as hell answerable to the people that live around DC and they still have to work in the same city as DC residents live. Less political power doesn’t mean zero political power.
  - kelseyfrog 4y ago
    I feel like I have something to learn, but the equivalent would be as if the CT and MA senators were upset if RI decided to house the prisoners? (ignoring the politics inside RI completely)
    - SllX 4y ago
      If Rhode Island were offering to hold them in its own State prison system, MA & CT wouldn’t have a say in the holding of prisoners, although they could maybe make the transfer messy. DC is not a separate sovereign from the Federal government, the DC government exists as an administrative convenience for Congress in the guise of self-government; which is to say the interests of DC and the White House are legally subordinate to the interests of the Senators and Representatives of the 50 States. The Federal Prison system like all aspects of the Federal government are subject to Senatorial review and while technically you only need enough votes, not necessarily the home Senators approval, the Senate does like to remain collegial and so there’s some things they don’t do unto each other when there’s a Presidential agenda to hold up instead, like at the time: Obama’s. Every Federal penitentiary is in some Senator’s State, and given how controversial it was to put militant combatants anywhere near, let alone through the United States criminal justice system, it’s not happening. Technically, if Congress wanted to house foreign terrorists in the DC city jail, there wouldn’t be anything that could legally hold up an Act of Congress to do so. They’re not motivated nor interested enough to do so, and a city jail isn’t the best place when there’s a Federal Supermax over in Colorado and Guantanamo Bay over in Cuba. It’s not that legally we can’t, it’s just whatever political benefits there are to it are outweighed by political risks to individual members of Congress. The prisoner population of Gitmo is a problem nobody wants, and keeping them there is as good a reason as any to maintain sovereignty in the area in the face of a hostile foreign government.

pavlov 4y ago

They can’t because Republican Congress during Obama’s presidency passed a law to prevent this.

throw0101c 4y ago
* https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/dec/20/joe-biden/congress-put-roadblocks-front-efforts-close-gitmo-/ https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/dec/20/joe-biden/... * https://theintercept.com/2015/11/10/congress-overwhelmingly-votes-to-block-guantanamo-closure/ https://theintercept.com/2015/11/10/congress-overwhelmingly-...