“The Fourth Amendment’s requirement of reasonableness — but not the Warrant Clause — applies to extraterritorial searches and seizures of U.S. citizens,” the judge wrote.
This simply streamlines the process, eliminates the middleman, and increases efficiency, while reducing paperwork and the cost to the taxpayer. Everyone wins!
Since then, there has been a national debate over whether people accused of terrorism should be treated as criminals and tried in the federal courts, or held as enemy combatants to be tried, if at all, before military tribunals, where defendants have fewer rights and there is less public disclosure.
It’s really simple, just create a new court specifically for accused terrorists modeled on the system used in various totalitarian states: prisoners are assumed guilty, since they would not be before the court if they weren’t, and thus the court only has to decide the sentence, which would be based the recommendation of the arresting authority. The minimum sentence would be death, and the maximum sentence would be death after torture. This court would of course be privatized, with the job going to the lowest bidder.