Describe whether the proposed Secret Terrorism Trial Bill violate the Sixth Amendment right to confront the witnesses against you.
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 presidents 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 violate the Sixth Amendment right to confront the witnesses against you.
Explain whether the governments 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.
Solved by verified expertLooking for a similar assignment?
Let Us write for you! We offer custom paper writing services
If the proposed Secret Terrorism Trial Bill were to restrict the ability of the accused to confront witnesses against them, it could potentially violate the Sixth Amendment. However, it is important to note that the Constitution does allow for certain exceptions to the Confrontation Clause, such as when a witness is unavailable to testify and their prior testimony is deemed reliable.
It would ultimately depend on the specific language and provisions of the proposed bill, as well as the interpretation and application of the Sixth Amendment by the courts, to determine whether it would violate the right to confront witnesses in criminal trials.
