« Jimmy Carter on Obama's lack of substance and experience | Obama on why he shouldn't have run for president »
PrintJune 12, 2008
Supreme Court Insists Terrorists have Habeus Corpus Rights
By the narrowest of margins, 5-4, the United States Supreme Court granted the constitutional protection of Habeus Corpus to foreign nationals being held at Guantanamo:
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.
Well that's it, war over. I wonder who won?
The Supreme Court has all but said that the US is not at war with anyone, that the detainees at Gitmo are just like any other foreigners who come to the US to see the sights. Perhaps we can get them all in a bus and have them visit the Supreme Court building. I am sure they would wish to thank the justices personally.
Just make sure to keep them away from sharp objects that could be used to saw off heads. We wouldn't want to lose any of our eminent jurists because of the actions of some foreign tourists.
I like Scalia's dissent. He doesn't mince words:
Just whose side are these guys on anyway? Don't tell me they're on the side of the "Constitution." The Constitution is not a suicide pact. And yet 5 justices felt it necessary to empower those who would just as soon stick a knife in our ribs as say "Howdy."
The Supreme Court has all but said that the US is not at war with anyone, that the detainees at Gitmo are just like any other foreigners who come to the US to see the sights. Perhaps we can get them all in a bus and have them visit the Supreme Court building. I am sure they would wish to thank the justices personally.
Just make sure to keep them away from sharp objects that could be used to saw off heads. We wouldn't want to lose any of our eminent jurists because of the actions of some foreign tourists.
I like Scalia's dissent. He doesn't mince words:
In dissent, Chief Justice John Roberts criticized his colleagues for striking down what he called "the most generous set of procedural protections ever afforded aliens detained by this country as enemy combatants."Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas also dissented.Scalia said the nation is "at war with radical Islamists" and that the court's decision "will make the war harder on us. It will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed."Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, David Souter and John Paul Stevens joined Kennedy to form the majority.
Just whose side are these guys on anyway? Don't tell me they're on the side of the "Constitution." The Constitution is not a suicide pact. And yet 5 justices felt it necessary to empower those who would just as soon stick a knife in our ribs as say "Howdy."
