Donald Rumsfeld is the most recent recipient of the American Conservative Union’s honorable ‘Defender of the Constitution Award’. I explain how Rumsfeld subverted the Constitution by only reading part of a grammatically complex sentence in Article 1 Section 9. The Writ of Habeas Corpus was carefully and simply written into our constitution to protect all of us in troubled times.
Donald Rumsfeld is the most recent recipient of the American Conservative Union’s honorable ‘Defender of the Constitution Award’. This award suggests that, at the very least, there are no glaring contradictions between his actions and what the Constitution clearly states. While I don’t question Mr. Rumsfeld’s patriotism or aspirations to defend the American people, I do find fault in his interpretation of our Constitution, specifically, the Writ of Habeas Corpus and the way in which Mr. Rumsfeld completely disregarded Article 1 Section 9 of the US Constitution. Until his actions were made public, he subverted the Constitution by detaining individuals without reason of proof to the detainee’s guilt in a court. I believe he did this by intentionally misinterpreting a simple grammatical clause.
Article 1 Section 9 of the US Constitution states:
"…The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it. …"
In the English language, this is known as a complex sentence because it clearly defines the main idea of the sentence. The first clause, ‘The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended,’ stands on its own as a sentence. The second clause, ‘unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it,’ is a dependent clause because of the use of the word ‘unless’. This means the ideas of the dependent clause do not stand on their own; they are dependent upon the preceding idea.
To me, this implies that first and foremost, Habeas Corpus may not be suspended, and that it should be protected excepting only for instances that immediately threaten the public. This also means that once the rebellion or invasion is under control, the privileges we protect in times of peace once again become law. After all, we are not a broken union that establishes lawlessness, insures domestic chaos, provides for the common aggression, promotes the general depression, and secures the curses of repression to ourselves and our posterity. We believe in and pursue peace because it promotes justice and prosperity.
Mr. Rumsfeld has done our Nation great harm by willfully misinterpreting our Constitution. He did this by pursuing a preconceived idea rather than the carefully crafted language used in our United States Constitution. Mr. Rumsfeld, I don’t believe you are deserving of the ‘Defender of the Constitution Award’. While I recognize that it is being awarded by an organization that shares your views, it doesn’t change the fact that you are all in need of a refresher course in basic English and chose to violate one of the basic tenets of our Constitution.
The coin:
Huffingtonpost
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
Human Events
http://www.humanevents.com/...