The Premise/Hint !
Senator Lindsey Graham (LG): So when somebody says, post-9/11, that we've been at war, and it's called the War on Terrorism, do you generally agree with that concept?
Supreme Court Justice nominee Brett Kavanaugh (BK): I do, Senator, because Congress passed the Authorization for Use of Military Force, which is still in effect, and that was passed, of course, on September 14, 2001, three days later.
LG: Let's talk about the law in war. Is there a body of law called the law of armed conflict?
BK: There is such a body, Senator.
LG: Is there a body of law that's called basic criminal law?
BK: Yes, Senator.
LG: Are there differences between those two bodies of law?
BK: Yes, Senator.
LG: From an American citizen's point of view, do your constitutional rights follow you? If you're in Paris, does the Fourth Amendment protect you as an American from your own government?
BK: From your own government, yes.
LG: Okay. So if you're in Afghanistan, do your constitutional rights protect you against your own government?
BK: If you're an American in Afghanistan, you have constitutional rights as against the U.S. Government. That's long settled law.
LG: Isn't there also a long settled law that goes back to the Eisentrager case. I can't remember the name of it.
BK: Johnson v. Eisentrager.
LG: Right. That American citizens who collaborate with the enemy are considered enemy combatants?
BK: They can be.
LG: Can be.
BK: They can be. They're often. They're sometimes criminally prosecuted. They're sometimes treated in the military system.
LG: Well let's talk about "can be".
BK: Under Supreme Court precedent.
LG: There's a Supreme Court decision that said that American citizens who collaborated with Nazi saboteurs were tried by the military. Is that correct?
BK: That is correct.
LG: I think a couple of them were executed.
BK: Yeah.
LG: So if anybody doubts, there is a longstanding history in this country that your constitutional rights follow you wherever you go, but you don't have a constitutional right to turn on your own government and collaborate with the enemy of the nation. You'll be treated differently. What's the name of the case, if you can recall, that reaffirmed the concept that you could hold one of our own as an enemy combatant if they were engaged in terrorist activities in Afghanistan? Are you familiar with that case?
BK: Yeah. Hamdi.
LG: Okay. So the bottom line is I want every American citizen to know you have constitutional rights but you do not have a constitutional right to collaborate with the enemy. There's a body of law well developed long before 9/11 that understood the difference between basic criminal law and the law of armed conflict. Do you understand those differences?
BK: I do understand that they're different bodies of law, of course, Senator.
...................................................................................
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2018-amendments-manual-courts-martial-united-states/
All you Liberals better THINK Real Hard !
Senator Lindsey Graham (LG): So when somebody says, post-9/11, that we've been at war, and it's called the War on Terrorism, do you generally agree with that concept?
Supreme Court Justice nominee Brett Kavanaugh (BK): I do, Senator, because Congress passed the Authorization for Use of Military Force, which is still in effect, and that was passed, of course, on September 14, 2001, three days later.
LG: Let's talk about the law in war. Is there a body of law called the law of armed conflict?
BK: There is such a body, Senator.
LG: Is there a body of law that's called basic criminal law?
BK: Yes, Senator.
LG: Are there differences between those two bodies of law?
BK: Yes, Senator.
LG: From an American citizen's point of view, do your constitutional rights follow you? If you're in Paris, does the Fourth Amendment protect you as an American from your own government?
BK: From your own government, yes.
LG: Okay. So if you're in Afghanistan, do your constitutional rights protect you against your own government?
BK: If you're an American in Afghanistan, you have constitutional rights as against the U.S. Government. That's long settled law.
LG: Isn't there also a long settled law that goes back to the Eisentrager case. I can't remember the name of it.
BK: Johnson v. Eisentrager.
LG: Right. That American citizens who collaborate with the enemy are considered enemy combatants?
BK: They can be.
LG: Can be.
BK: They can be. They're often. They're sometimes criminally prosecuted. They're sometimes treated in the military system.
LG: Well let's talk about "can be".
BK: Under Supreme Court precedent.
LG: There's a Supreme Court decision that said that American citizens who collaborated with Nazi saboteurs were tried by the military. Is that correct?
BK: That is correct.
LG: I think a couple of them were executed.
BK: Yeah.
LG: So if anybody doubts, there is a longstanding history in this country that your constitutional rights follow you wherever you go, but you don't have a constitutional right to turn on your own government and collaborate with the enemy of the nation. You'll be treated differently. What's the name of the case, if you can recall, that reaffirmed the concept that you could hold one of our own as an enemy combatant if they were engaged in terrorist activities in Afghanistan? Are you familiar with that case?
BK: Yeah. Hamdi.
LG: Okay. So the bottom line is I want every American citizen to know you have constitutional rights but you do not have a constitutional right to collaborate with the enemy. There's a body of law well developed long before 9/11 that understood the difference between basic criminal law and the law of armed conflict. Do you understand those differences?
BK: I do understand that they're different bodies of law, of course, Senator.
...................................................................................
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2018-amendments-manual-courts-martial-united-states/
All you Liberals better THINK Real Hard !