It’s No Longer Illegal To Be A Lying Lowlife Scumbag

You still can’t legally yell fire in a crowded theater, but thanks to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, it’s now your Constitutional right to pretend that you’re a member of the military and fraudulently wear fake medals in public.

Court again strikes down Stolen Valor Act

A federal appeals court panel ruled Tuesday that people have a right to lie about receiving military medals, the second federal court decision in a month to go against the Stolen Valor Act.

Xavier Alvarez, who falsely claimed in 2007 to have received the Medal of Honor, challenged the law on appeal after he was charged with violating the act, which makes it a crime to falsely claim to have won a military medal.

Alvarez said the act is a violation of free-speech rights.

A panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals sided with Alvarez in a 2-1 decision.

The majority said there was no evidence that such lies harm anybody, and there is no compelling reason for the government to ban such lies.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office in Los Angeles said it is deciding whether to appeal the ruling.

See also:
Appeals court: Stolen Valor Act unconstitutional
Court: Lying about Medal of Honor is no crime
9th Circuit finds a right to lie
Ninth Circuit Declares Stolen Valor Act Unconstitutional
Public Law 109–437
Stolen Valor Act of 2005

No evidence that such lies harm anybody, how about the psychological harm to all the real veterans who actually served and were awarded real medals for their real sacrifices and real wounds? And what about the pain felt by the families of those medal recipients who gave the ultimate sacrifice?

/this ruling is such bull[expletive deleted], why does it not surprise me that it came out of California and the 9th Circus?

The World’s Worst Al Qaeda Terrorists, Coming Soon To A U.S. City Near You

What a great idea, what could possibly go wrong?

Senate votes to allow Guantanamo transfers to US soil for trial

THE US Senate has voted 79-19 to allow Guantanamo Bay detainees to be brought to US soil for trial, boosting President Barack Obama’s efforts to close the notorious facility.

The green light came in a $US42.7 billion spending bill for the US Department of Homeland Security in 2010, which easily cleared the House of Representatives last week and now heads to Obama to sign into law.

Obama vowed on his second day in office to shutter the facility, a magnet for global criticism of US tactics in the “war on terrorism,” by January 22, though White House aides say they face an uphill fight to keep that promise.

Of the roughly 220 people still held at the controversial prison camp, which then-president George W. Bush opened in January 2002, about 80 are waiting to be released and a further 60 are expected to be prosecuted.

The House-approved measure forbids the release of detainees at the US naval base in Cuba onto US soil, and requires a detailed assessment of the possible security risk before they can be brought to trial in the United States.

. . .

The bill did not address whether the Obama administration can hold prisoners indefinitely without charge in the United States and left unclear what the fate would be of those who may be tried and acquitted.

You’re damn right that it’s unclear what would happen if any of these terrorists were to be tried and acquitted on U.S. soil. What would happen? We already know that most of these terrorists can’t be deported to other countries because no other country is willing to accept them. What then? They can’t very well be locked up again after they’ve been acquitted. The only other possible alternative is to release them within the United States. Think that’s a far fetched possibility? Think again, it’s already close to happening.

Guantanamo detainees case reaches Supreme Court

The Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to decide whether Guantanamo detainees who are considered no threat can be ordered released in the United States — over the objections of the Obama administration and Congress — if the prisoners have nowhere else to go.

. . .

The justices said they will hear a challenge from the Chinese Muslims, or Uighurs (WEE’-gurs), who are asking the court to put some teeth into its June 2008 ruling that said federal judges could ultimately order some detainees to be released, depending on security concerns and other circumstances.

Acting after the Supreme Court ruling, a federal judge in Washington said the Uighurs must be released immediately into the United States because their continued confinement was unjustified and the U.S. government could find no country willing to take them.

A federal appeals court, however, said the judge lacked the authority to order detainees released into the United States, setting up the new high court challenge.

So, what happens when the world’s worst terrorists face trial in Federal court, on U.S. soil, and the prosecution’s case collapses due to lack of evidence, tainted evidence due to improper interrogation or a faulty chain of evidence, or the inability to present evidence due to national security concerns, what then? Once a trial starts, the only two eventual outcomes are conviction or acquittal. What happens if any of the hardcore al Qaeda operatives, sworn to kill as many Americans as possible, are acquitted in Federal court, on U.S. soil, can’t be deported, and can’t be locked up again? What then?

See also:
Congress Approves Trying Guantanamo Terror Suspects in U.S.
Senate allows more transfers of detainees to U.S. for trial
Congress passes Guantanamo bill
Senate OKs transfer of Gitmo prisoners for trials
US Congress votes to allow Guantanamo transfers to US
Guantanamo prisoner restrictions clear Congress
Court to Decide on U.S. Release of Uighurs at Gitmo
Supreme Court to hear appeal from Guantánamo Bay Uighur prisoners
U.S. top court to hear Guantanamo Uighurs appeal
Guantanamo Inmates Get High Court Review on Release
Supreme Court To Hear Appeal From Uighurs Held At Guantanamo
High court accepts Guantanamo Uyghur case

One thing we do know for sure is that the second these al Qaeda jihadis set foot on U.S. soil proper, each one of them will have the best free criminal defense lawyers the ACLU and other liberal organizations can provide, banging on every Federal courthouse door in the country, on a crusade to attach the full panoply of legal rights enjoyed by U.S. citizens to their terrorist clients. Removing these unlawful combatants from a perfectly good military prison and military tribunal system at Guantanamo Bay and bringing them onto U.S. soil, to be tried in Federal court, ranks right up there as one of the dumbest ideas ever.

/not only is there a possibility that stone cold al Qaeda killers might eventually be released into the United States, but the whole Federal court trial and appeal process will become a farcical circus, a public stage for the jihadi “martyrs”, that will drag on for years, jeopardize national security interests through discovery, and cost the American taxpayers many millions of dollars