Public Trial

 

Prior to beginning your written assignment read the Criminal Procedure (Links to an external site.) article, Right to a Speedy and Public Trial – Public Trial (Links to an external site.) article, the Right to Confront Witness (Links to an external site.) article, Right to Counsel (Links to an external site.) article and review the Supreme Court Opinions synopses.

Read the following case scenario:

In the ongoing war on terrorism, the new president has proposed expanding the jurisdiction of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA). FISA is a U.S. federal court established and authorized under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 to oversee requests for surveillance warrants against foreign spies inside the United States by federal law. The new president’s proposed Secret Terrorism Trial Bill will expand the jurisdiction of the FISA to hold secret, non-public trials of accused terrorists for any planned or actual acts of terrorism on U.S. soil. The bill will also allow witnesses to testify before the FISA Court by remote video with their identities kept secret from the accused and any defense team. The stated purpose for the secrecy is to allow trials of terrorists without giving them a public platform for their radical ideology and to allow witnesses to testify without fear of reprisals from terrorist groups such as ISIS or Al-Qaeda.

Write a paper addressing the following:

Explain whether the proposed Secret Terrorism Trial Bill violates the Sixth Amendment right to a public trial,
Describe whether the proposed Secret Terrorism Trial Bill violates the Sixth Amendment right to confront the witnesses against you.
Explain whether the government’s overriding need to fight terrorism outweighs the Sixth Amendment rights of the accused.
Identify whether the Sixth Amendment applies to terrorists since the writers of the Constitution could not have envisioned mass shootings and suicide bombers.

 

Sample Solution

The terrorist attack against the United States on September 11, 2001, breached the balance between human rights and national security. This breach has had a dual effect: it has led to the impairment of the constitutional rights of the citizens of the United States itself, and also to the impairment of the basic rights of non-U.S. citizens, suspected or accused of terrorist offenses. The proposed Secret Terrorism Trial Bill violates the Sixth Amendment right to a public trial. The Sixth Amendment guarantees the rights of criminal defendants, including the right to a public trial without unnecessary delay, the right to a lawyer, the right to an impartial jury, and the right to know who your accusers are and the nature of the charges and evidence against you.

Because of the incidental idea of massacre, how late destructive investigations has created, and how little information is accessible, it is challenging to say precisely exact thing the fundamental and adequate circumstances are for ethnic slaughter to happen. That being said, for my hypothetical result, I can derive that to go from ethnic struggle to decimation, it is first essential for their to be a legitimate system. Utilizing a more thin meaning of dictatorship from the Cambridge word reference as, “the conviction that individuals should obey totally and not be permitted opportunity to go about as they wish,” we can infer that it would be totally vital and adequate for an ethnic decimation to happen under a legitimate system. Legitimate systems don’t rely upon its residents, accordingly, are held without responsibility. Without responsibility, the elites can follow up on their own philosophies and with no element controlling their hand. Political shakiness, in types of upheaval, turn of force, or decolonization, is an essential and adequate impetus for slaughter. Political shakiness might cause stress on ruling elites, who might feel undermined by the progressions happening inside the state and apprehension about losing capacity to other ethnic gatherings who might take advantage of the disorder and bring down them out of force (McDoom). With the destabilization that happens during a political unsteadiness, the requirements of the past political framework are proceeded to can raise doubt about the elites in control and reclassify who the ‘elites’ can be. Albeit a state/non-state entertainer spreading criticizing publicity and depicting an unfriendly generalizations onto an ethnic gathering, frequently dehumanizing them would be an important and adequate condition for ethnic struggle, it would just be an essential condition for an ethnic massacre. Disdainful publicity would make pressure between ethnic gatherings, perhaps even viciousness, however not a demonstration of ethnic massacre. A few presumptions that should be made for this hypothetical result would be factors like area, and race wouldn’t be essentially compelling. I will likewise be zeroing in on just equitable and dictator systems, keeping from different kinds of government. The coherent arguments and significant premises behind my contention are: 1) on the off chance that a legitimate state has ethnic struggle, there will be ethnic massacre, and 2) in the event that a state with ethnic clash is going through political unsteadiness, there will be ethni

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.