On the recordJune 13, 2013
I share with the author of this amendment the goal of clarifying and strengthening the time-honored writ of habeas corpus for all American citizens. But my concern is that sometimes by omission we limit people's rights. This amendment is very carefully, but narrowly, drawn in such a way it begs questions about the exclusion of those outside the ambit of this amendment and their rights. The gentleman, I know in good faith, is trying to promulgate an amendment that broadens the right of the writ of habeas corpus. But I think when compared with the Smith-Gibson language that this modifies, that it raises by omission an intention of the Congress to narrow the right of habeas corpus. So although it is not the gentleman's intent, I believe it is the effect of this amendment. Those who believe that the right of habeas should be strengthened and broadened, I believe should oppose this amendment and support the underlying language as I, in fact, do. The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte). The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes appeared to have it.
