«--Previous Post | Blog Index | Next Post--»
SCOTUS Rules Gitmo Detainees Can Challenge Detention in US Civilian Courts
The Supreme Court has ruled in favor of Guantanamo detainees yet again. According to the AP, SCOTUS ruled today that "foreign terrorism suspects held at Guantanamo Bay have rights under the Constitution to challenge their detention in U.S. civilian courts."
In its third rebuke of the Bush administration's treatment of prisoners, the court ruled 5-4 that the government is violating the rights of prisoners being held indefinitely and without charges at the U.S. naval base in Cuba. The court's liberal justices were in the majority.
Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the court, said, "The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times."
It was not immediately clear whether this ruling, unlike the first two, would lead to prompt hearings for the detainees, some of whom have been held more than 6 years. Roughly 270 men remain at the island prison, classified as enemy combatants and held on suspicion of terrorism or links to al-Qaida and the Taliban.
We may finally see some progress on this issue. Twice before, the Supreme Court has ruled prisoners at Guantanamo held without charges can go to American civilian courts to ask that the federal government justify their detention. Both times, Congress has changed the law to keep them from doing so. But in both instances, Congress was controlled by Republicans and the White House was occupied by George Bush. With Democrats in control of Congress and two presidential candidates who favor the shuttering of Gitmo, we may finally begin down the path to justice sometime in 2009.
Background on the case is available here. For the recent Mother Jones cover package on detainees and torture, see here. For an inside look at Guantanao, check this out.
Comments
Maybe. Hopefully.
It appears to me that there are so many legislators involved in the Bush administration's corruption that unless we vote them all out, WE THE PEOPLE are going to be stuck with the effects of their corruption forever.
I would say that we should vote out of the House all the Representatives that did not vote for the Impeachment of Bush in the Congressional Primary coming up in July, as well as all the Senators who are against impeachment.
Perhaps we may now arrest Bush and Cheney for standing in violation of the US Constitution and commit them to Guantanimo Bay prison for an indefinite period of time.
Posted by: robert Buckenmeyer on 06/13/08 at 12:28 PM Respond
Dear Robert Buckenmeyer,
I'm sorry to have to inform you, but holding Bush & Cheney accountable for their numerous and well documented mis-deeds is "OFF The Table".
For heaven's Sake..! If Beltway Bigwigs start holding each other Accountable, I Could Be NEXT!!!
www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200805/POL20080521a.html
http://opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110009908
Sincerely,
Nancy Pelosi
Posted by: Nancy P. on 06/13/08 at 1:07 PM Respond
Mr. Buckenmeyer, I like your suggestion, really like it.
As follows:
Posted by: robert Buckenmeyer "Perhaps we may now arrest Bush and Cheney for standing in violation of the US Constitution and commit them to Guantanimo Bay prison for an indefinite period of time."
Posted by: robert Buckenmeyer on 06/13/08 at 12:28 PM Respond
Posted by: P. Eischen on 06/13/08 at 5:21 PM Respond
While I AGREE with today's majority opinion that "all enemy combatants detained during a war, at least insofar as they are confined in an area away from the battlefield, [but] over which the United States exercises 'absolute and indefinite' control, may seek a writ of habeas corpus in federal court," I also AGREE with Chief Justice Roberts (and his fellow dissenters) that the Writ can be suspended in time of war, such as the war on terror that we find ourselves involved in right now, and that suspension power belongs to Congress, such as Congress has exercised in this case, "as the Constitution surely allows Congress to [wield]."
I guess one can REASONABLY conclude that the Court's Majority knew where they wanted to end up, and proceeded to get there, however s-l-o-w-l-y they weaved their way through precedential minefield!
OsiSpeaks.com
Posted by: KYJurisDoctor on 06/13/08 at 9:34 PM Respond
Giving the detainees rights equal to those of US citizens will make the process we are using at Gitmo appear to be equitable and fair. USA already has had its reputation besmirched by various persons who were seized, imprisoned, and tortured either by our people or by other countries in "exstraordinary rendition" programs.
Improving our appearance of fairness in dealing with alleged terrorists improves USA image all over the world.
It also helps our military and intelligence guys who confront those whom we detain. A man who knonws that truly miserable conditions await him if he is captured will decide to fight to the last bullet and grenadeand not to bve taken alive. If he takes out one or more of our people in the process he will be very happy about this as he dies.
It is also a given that dead men cannot be interrogated.
W.
Posted by: walter77777 on 06/14/08 at 7:11 AM Respond
KYJurisDoctor:
In your control quote, I think you meant "absolute and definite" control, didn't you?
For what reason could there be for the U.S. Government to keep supposed enemy combatants "forever" without any kind of trial, 1st from Afghanistan and then Iraq???????
Bush's Afghan Incursion was over when he left Afghanistan and invaded Iraq for another incursion, and Afghan prisoners would have then been turned loose, if this was a war. Now, Bush's Iraq Incursion must be over because Bush is pushing for an incursion of Iran. Bush went back to Afghanistan for a 2nd incursion, but no person from Afghanistan or Iraq attacked the United States or even threatened to attack the United States.
The people who supposedly attacked the United States were Saudi Arabians.
Invasions aren't wars, only incursions. No real war between countries goes on forever, a war will be fought until one side puts the other side down, then there will be a treaty signed relative to what the war was about, but since this was only a U.S. incursion, no treaties have even been mentioned in Afghanistan. Incursions that the United States is involved in are NOT REAL WARS between countries, only insurgents fighting off a U.S. incursion, because in a real war all enemy combatants are turned loose when the war is over. Enemy combatants are only kept to find out what they know while the war is continuing in their country -- NO REAL WAR LASTS FOREVER.
The U.S. Government paid for these supposed enemy combatants to be turned in by their fellow countrymen as enemy combatants. Paying for a supposed enemy combatant doesn't make that person an enemy combatant. And, an insurgent isn't an enemy combatant any more than you would be if a thief chose to rob your house.
The Supreme Court has authority over any person on U.S. soil, and I am overwhelming glad that the Supreme Court decided these supposed enemy combatants have a right to a trial.
Posted by: MarthaA on 06/14/08 at 11:19 AM Respond
Bravo for the Supreme Court in finally making this decision. But history has proven that this presidential administration will only just change tactics. They will continue as they have and progressively get worse.
Detainees in Gitmo now have rights? They'll stop putting them in Gitmo.
Posted by: nakis on 06/16/08 at 4:36 AM Respond
Why not Pelosi as well as Saddam. Seems reasonable and just to me. Honestly, Nancy Pelosi, I don't blame you for the dirty deeds but why do you think any of you in govt. shouldn't be held responsible in the same way as Saddam. ?
Marian Conn
Posted by: marian conn on 06/18/08 at 9:53 AM Respond
Dear Marian Conn,
You must keep in mind that my actions are always undertaken for the Greater Good.
Motives, after all, are much more important than Methods, and my Motives are invariably pure.
Saddam, on the other hand, was a person interested only in maintaining his own power and authority. He deserved his punishment as his motives were Impure, except, of course for those years when he was fighting our war against Iran for us.
Sincerely,
Nancy Pelosi
Posted by: Nancy P. on 06/18/08 at 10:37 AM Respond
ARCHIVE
August 10, 2008 - August 16, 2008
August 3, 2008 - August 9, 2008
July 27, 2008 - August 2, 2008
April 20, 2008 - April 26, 2008
April 13, 2008 - April 19, 2008
April 6, 2008 - April 12, 2008
March 30, 2008 - April 5, 2008
March 23, 2008 - March 29, 2008
March 16, 2008 - March 22, 2008
March 9, 2008 - March 15, 2008
February 24, 2008 - March 1, 2008
February 17, 2008 - February 23, 2008
February 10, 2008 - February 16, 2008
February 3, 2008 - February 9, 2008
January 27, 2008 - February 2, 2008
January 20, 2008 - January 26, 2008
January 13, 2008 - January 19, 2008
January 6, 2008 - January 12, 2008
December 30, 2007 - January 5, 2008
December 23, 2007 - December 29, 2007
December 16, 2007 - December 22, 2007
RECENT COMMENTS
McCain's Bizarre Undiscovered Foreign Policy Ideas (12)
Drunk Philosopher wrote:
To Jim, quote: "The "insightful" Zakaria calls Iran and No...
[more]
Partition in Iraq: A Serious Problem With Biden as VP? (19)
massimo wrote:
Elydog is right,it's a Zionist plan to braek up Iraq
and J...
[more]
The Campaign Goes Christian (3)
Sharon wrote:
Vote for Ralph Nader for real change. Obama is a hypocrite...
[more]
The Rooskies Are Out to Get Us! (6)
Emphyrio wrote:
5. They think it's the state of Georgia where the Atlanta ...
[more]
Troops Abroad Give to Obama 6:1 (2)
Jeugenen wrote:
LIBERAL OBAMA OR NEO-CON/NEO-LIB MC-CAIN
The political st...
[more]
Speedo's $600 Swimsuits: Made in America, Bought by China (45)
Brandon wrote:
Tech has not gone too far. This is simply another geegaw ...
[more]
Why is HHS Secretary Mike Leavitt Blogging About Abortion? (1)
PeaceNick wrote:
I think what Secretary Leavitt and the Bush administration...
[more]
Under for Fire for Pastor's Remarks, Obama To Give Major Speech on Race (11)
Acomplia wrote:
Generic Acomplia is an Anti Obesity Drug that is Best Weig...
[more]
Responding to MoJo, Huckabee Campaign Explains Difference Between Homosexuality and Necrophilia (19)
dış cephe wrote:
teşekürler....
[more]
Ginsburg's Famous White Gloves Finally Come Off (21)
dış cephe wrote:
teşekürler....
[more]
Movable Type 3.33


Posted by: MarthaA on 06/12/08 at 9:26 AM Respond