Balkinization  

Friday, July 20, 2007

To sleep, perchance to dream

Marty Lederman

The Washington Post:
"Bush's order requires that CIA detainees 'receive the basic necessities of life, including adequate food and water, shelter from the elements, necessary clothing, protection from extremes of heat and cold, and essential medical care.'"
So far, so good.
"A second senior administration official acknowledged sleep is not among the basic necessities outlined in the order."
Ay, there's the rub.

Comments:

"Terrorists" don't need sleep: they spend their nights plotting.
because they hate our freedoms [including that of sleeping].
 

jnagarya:

"Terrorists" don't need sleep: they spend their nights plotting.
because they hate our freedoms [including that of sleeping].


And even better yet ... witches float.

If they go stir crazy or drown, they're innocent, and if they withstand the test, you can burn 'em.

Cheers,
 

Great, now there's a Constitutional right to a good night's sleep.
 

Great, now there's a Constitutional right to a good night's sleep.

Then surely you won't mind the Led Zepplin concert outside your window.
 

L.S.,

Given that structural lack of sleep is seriously unhealthy, I'm fairly certain the 5th amendment has something to say about sleep...
 

Great, now there's a Constitutional right to a good night's sleep.

Then surely you won't mind the Led Zepplin concert outside your window.

# posted by Mark Field : 11:23 AM

"Charles" doesn't need sleep; he spends his nights praying that we have fewer freedoms ASAP.
 

WOO HOO!! Zeplin concert!
 

The use of the term "including" prior to the list means that the list is not comprehensive. Nitpicking the list is a game of semantic gotchya.

The more interesting thing about this provision of executive order is the use of terms like "necessities," "adequate" and "necessary" to qualify this list of prisoner guarantees. Under these terms, so long as the CIA detainee is provided enough of care to live, he is receiving the "basic necessities of life."
 

Agreed, Bart.
 

The use of the term "including" prior to the list means that the list is not comprehensive. Nitpicking the list is a game of semantic gotchya.

Ah, so the use of the term "including" in the WCA's definition of "cruel or inhuman treatment" means that that list is not comprehensive, therefore anyone that denies the inclusion of long-term sleep deprivation on the basis of the text is just engaging in a game of semantic gotchya.

Good to know!
 

PMS_Chicago:

Ah, so the use of the term "including" in the WCA's definition of "cruel or inhuman treatment" means that that list is not comprehensive, therefore anyone that denies the inclusion of long-term sleep deprivation on the basis of the text is just engaging in a game of semantic gotchya.

Oh, you misunderstand. In "Bart's" world, it's "textualism" for me, but not for thee...." A variant on the old game "Bart" was so good at as a kid (and thus persists at): "Head's I win, tails you lose."

Cheers,
 

Post a Comment

Older Posts
Newer Posts
Home