Dzhokhar Tsarnaev will be tried in civilian court, not military tribunal

If the feds are treating him like an enemy combatant, why are they going to try him in civilian court? I understand he is a naturalized citizen, but can't they revoke his citizenship for his behavior?

 

They're not treating him like an enemy combatant.

They delayed advising him of his Miranda rights for 48 hours or so under a national security exception.

Unless he lied on his citizenship application, there are no grounds for revoking his citizenship.

Maybe he should not have been given citizenship, but once given, it's not -- and shouldn't be -- easy to revoke, and he get the rights that come with it.

 

Why start a new thread about this?

 

Is this the Shit On Obama and Eric Holder thread?

 

Not even close. I have no problem with how the Justice Department has handled this situation so far. They were dealt a very shitty hand and have done as well as could be expected.

Yankee...isn't there a loyalty oath as part of the process of becoming a citizen? Could they look at his behavior as violating that loyalty oath?

I started a new thread because this is not about the bombing, more about how the post-bombing decisions are being made.

 

Committing any crime is a violation of that oath. Even speeding.

 

He's a U.S. Citizen who committed crimes in the USA. What kind of enemy is he? Does everyone who gets in a shootout with cops become an enemy combatant?

 

Yes, but you can't argue that speeding and bombing civilians should be looked at the same.

 

More important question: What if he were innocent?

I don't know what the policy is on revoking citizenship once granted/earned, but it seems like even if it were possible, it would have to happen after a trial and conviction/plea bargain, not before, right?

 

Good point. How about making him take the oath again in court?

 

The guy is a citizen. Period.

 

But you'd still have to try him in civilian court, which seems to be the issue, right? Where he's tried?