. . . which ended in the death of 76 Americans, including 21 children.

What if Clinton had listened to Crona and Richardson?

We can only imagine what would have happened if the Clinton Administration had actually implemented this plan, with Clinton declaring members of militias to be “unlawful enemy combatants” and subjecting them to military trials and execution. That would have been the worst fears of the militia and patriot movement come true. The message from President Clinton would have been essentially this:

For you people, who oppose the federal government, who form citizen militias, the Bill of Rights is hereby forever suspended, and as "unlawful combatants" you ar...

. . . which ended in the death of 76 Americans, including 21 children.

What if Clinton had listened to Crona and Richardson?

We can only imagine what would have happened if the Clinton Administration had actually implemented this plan, with Clinton declaring members of militias to be “unlawful enemy combatants” and subjecting them to military trials and execution. That would have been the worst fears of the militia and patriot movement come true. The message from President Clinton would have been essentially this:

For you people, who oppose the federal government, who form citizen militias, the Bill of Rights is hereby forever suspended, and as "unlawful combatants" you are subject to being shot on sight wherever found, subject to indefinite military detention, under my orders, and subject to the laws of war as applied by a military commission established by me, under my authority as commander-in-chief of the armed forces. If that military commission finds you guilty, you will be executed, and any possible appeal will only be to me, as the final decider of your guilt or innocence, pursuant to my independent and co-equal Article II powers as commander-in-chief.

However limited the initial application of such a policy, with the militia movement’s worst fears now confirmed they would have considered armed resistance appropriate and even necessary. Even if at first only one or two suspected militia members were held as unlawful combatants without trial, or one or two small groups, it is very possible that a cycle of action/reaction would have begun. A group resists. The government cracks down. More groups resist. The government cracks down harder. And on it would have gone.


Thankfully, none of that happened because the absurd, dangerous proposal of Crona and Richardson to side step the Bill of Rights received little attention.

So, we can all live happily ever after, right? Wrong. After 9-11, this idea was thrust into the limelight, and the application of the laws of war to terrorist suspects has now become official U.S. policy.


Within days of September 11, 2001, the article by Crona and Richardson was noticed by John Dean, former Attorney General and legal commentator on www.findlaw.com. On Friday, September 28, 2001, Dean published his article, Appropriate Justice for Terrorists: Using Military Tribunals Rather Than Criminal Courts. In that article, Dean praises Crona and Richardson’s proposal and cites heavily to their 1996 article, and then tells us this:

While I have drawn on Crona's and Richard...

So, we can all live happily ever after, right? Wrong. After 9-11, this idea was thrust into the limelight, and the application of the laws of war to terrorist suspects has now become official U.S. policy.


Within days of September 11, 2001, the article by Crona and Richardson was noticed by John Dean, former Attorney General and legal commentator on www.findlaw.com. On Friday, September 28, 2001, Dean published his article, Appropriate Justice for Terrorists: Using Military Tribunals Rather Than Criminal Courts. In that article, Dean praises Crona and Richardson’s proposal and cites heavily to their 1996 article, and then tells us this:

While I have drawn on Crona's and Richardson's scholarly analysis, and considered arguments in this column, I have not been able in this space to do it justice, and it is very much worth reading in its entirety. Indeed, I found the article so helpful that I also passed it on to a friend at the Department of Justice, requesting that he pass it on to those currently examining the potential of military tribunals.

It is probably impossible to know if their article actually formed the basis for the Bush Administration strategy, but the actions of the Bush Administration have been entirely consistent with what Crona and Richardson recommended." In the end, it does not matter whether the lawyers in the Bush Administration would have figured it out themselves (which is likely). What is important is that a very dangerous, and potentially explosive idea has now been given new life.


But surely Bush Administration lawyers had the good sense to at least draw a clear line between citizens and non-citizens, right? Wrong again. Relying on the exact same arguments as Crona and Richardson, the Bush lawyers insisted that citizenship is irrelevant and any U.S. citizen the president designates an “enemy combatant” can be held in military detention and tried by tribunal.