If Osama bin Laden, wearing no uniform, surrounded by children as human shields, and in mid-stroke while he’s sawing the head off a captured American nurse, is captured by American soldiers tomorrow in Pakistan or Afghanistan, then his rights to use the federal writ of habeas corpus to guarantee him the protections afforded by the United States Constitution will be, so far as I can determine, indistinguishable from my own if I were arrested at my home by the Houston Police Department on a warrant for overdue parking tickets.The Supreme Court has so ordered notwithstanding the fact that the people’s lawful representatives  through statutes passed by their Congress, and signed into law by their president  had otherwise decreed. Instead, five members of the Supreme Court have set themselves up above the rest of the people and government of the United States of America, and they have proclaimed that even acting together, the Congress and president lack the constitutional power to make other provisions for these foreign barbarians and monsters captured on foreign battlefields while trying to destroy America and everything related to it.
Spot on.
(h/t Patterico)
Comment by Kevin B on 6/14 @ 3:45 pm #
They’re lawyers Darleen. Lawyers decide who can be detained or not, not the people or their representatives. How can they make their money otherwise?
Comment by Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) on 6/14 @ 3:59 pm #
- Darleen – It may well be coming up on one of those times when “we the people” need to take back our country. When the people elected to safeguard our sovereignty against the enemies of ourselves and our way of life, then maybe they leave us no choice. The problem with people that consider themselves “elites” is they can get to the point where they consider themselves infallible, and stop listening to the wishes of the people that elected them in the firsy place. And in saying that I include everyone in Washington, because no matter how you feel about Bush, other than his steadfastness in Iraq, he hasn’t been a paragon of protecting the power of the PONTUS either.
- When the ACLU files a law suit transparently designed to hamstring the ability of our security people to do their jobs, and the small gaggle of loud mouth anti-Americans carry their water by pretending to protect our rights, and BushCo does next to nothing to fight back, then hes a part of the larger problem.
- This entire bullshit folly could be brought to a screeching halt if this fallacy were simply restated that anyone that attacks in a organized military action, any sovereign country, and chooses to do so with no flag of nation, or military bearing in type or style, then no rights what so ever accrue. Period. No Hague, No Geneva. Nada.
- As things stand the Lefturds have managed to use the Constitution against us and bring things to the point where Jihadist murderers have move and better defined rights than an American Fetus.
- Just when did foretgn thugs become de facto citizens of America. Giving them Constitutional rights makes a travesty of everything we’ve ever worked to build in this country.
- At some point the majority of Americans are going to say “enough”.
Comment by Sweating Though Fog on 6/14 @ 4:09 pm #
As I wrote on my blog, McCain could – if he goes further – win the election on this issue alone. All he has to do is say that if he is elected, he will ignore this Supreme Court decision. He could use the spectre of Osama Bin Laden and his lawyers in Federal courts to beat Obama like a rented mule.
Comment by Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) on 6/14 @ 4:21 pm #
- Its come to the point where the only people left that have no rights are the real victims of every sort of crime and fetuses. Way to go SecProggs. If they ever ask me to pick up a gun and join my fellow Americans to stop this craziness in its tracks I won’t hesitate.
Comment by B Moe on 6/14 @ 4:38 pm #
Does the ruling really say all that? I was under the impression it granted the rights because it ruled that Gitmo was US territory. Does the ruling cover US personnel world wide then?
Comment by Ric Locke on 6/14 @ 4:42 pm #
Dwyer (“Beldar”) is a lawyer, and a pretty good one, B Moe. I haven’t read the decision, having a fairly low tolerance for lawyerspeak, but I’m inclined to take Beldar at his word.
Regards,
Ric
Comment by geoffb on 6/14 @ 4:45 pm #
“it ruled that Gitmo was US territory.”
That should be news to the Castro Bros.
Wasn’t it these same 5 that did the Kelo ruling also? That one that says that only the Government in reality “owns” property. The rest of us only maintain it as long as our betters don’t know of someone who can use it more appropriately.
Comment by Darleen on 6/14 @ 4:58 pm #
B Moe
The US has maintained military detention areas in all manner of foreign countries. The decision does look like once a person is taken into custody by the US military, their right to a US civilian court kicks in.
It’s really a breathtaking grab by SCOTUS of the war powers from the Executive and Legislative branches.
Comment by B Moe on 6/14 @ 5:04 pm #
The US has maintained military detention areas in all manner of foreign countries. The decision does look like once a person is taken into custody by the US military, their right to a US civilian court kicks in.
That is fucking insane, then. The SCOTUS has basically told the rest of the world that terrorists have more legal rights than conventional armies. Do these senile old pinheads have no concept of cause and effect?
Comment by guinsPen on 6/14 @ 5:09 pm #
Happy Flag Day!
Stars and Stripes Forever
Comment by Jeff G. on 6/14 @ 5:17 pm #
The biggest problem with a living Constitution? Is that it can be killed.
Q.E.D.
Comment by LazyE4 on 6/14 @ 5:21 pm #
These people are more interested in making Bush look bad then in winning the WOT.
Comment by LazyE4 on 6/14 @ 5:25 pm #
I think it’s safe to say the Living Constitution is on a ventilator right now.
Comment by Darleen on 6/14 @ 5:26 pm #
The SCOTUS has basically told the rest of the world that terrorists have more legal rights than conventional armies
Yep.
Comment by Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) on 6/14 @ 5:36 pm #
- What do you do when the caretakers and Interns of the Institutions are crazier than the inmates?
Comment by B Moe on 6/14 @ 5:39 pm #
These people are more interested in making Bush look bad then in winning the WOT.
These people are more interested in making Bush look bad than their own survival.
Comment by alppuccino on 6/14 @ 5:42 pm #
I think it’s safe to say the Living Constitution is on a ventilator right now.
I believe you meant to say “breathalizer”.
Comment by Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) on 6/14 @ 5:46 pm #
- First they killed Jesus, then they killed the Constitution, lets hope they do the hat trick and commit suicide.
Comment by Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) on 6/14 @ 5:47 pm #
- Which is fine with me as long as they don’t take the rest of us with them.
Comment by geoffb on 6/14 @ 5:50 pm #
“I believe you meant to say “breathalizerâ€Â.”
Maybe “nebulaizer” but I can’t make out my teleprompter too well at this distance.
“Staff who wants to take the blame for this one?” “The bus is ready.”
Comment by Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) on 6/14 @ 5:53 pm #
- Make that the MagicBusâ„¢ ~O~!
Comment by geoffb on 6/14 @ 5:56 pm #
“WHO?”
Comment by The Lost Dog on 6/14 @ 5:56 pm #
BBH -
“- At some point the majority of Americans are going to say “enoughâ€Â.”
I am one half of a fucking inch from there. These assholes represent less than 20% of this country, and believe that they can rule by fiat. COCKSUCKERS!!!!!
I think there are a lot of people in this country who are just as pissed as we are. This is un-fucking-believeable!
Too bad that our only choice is McWhackadoodle. I am sick of him kicking me in the nuts every time I swallow another load of his bullshit and think: “Well, he’s better than O!”.
Did you hear his idiotic speech attacking the oil companies? CONGRESS, and only CONGRESS, is responsible for this oil shit hole that we are enduring.
Comment by Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) on 6/14 @ 6:21 pm #
- Well TLD, you know what you get whenever you ask Washington to police themselves. Its inevitable. But somethings got to give. Sooner or later people are going to start fighting back. The system has whored itself so badly it just doesn’t give a fuck what the electorate really want anymore.
- I’m still trying to figure out just how the fuck we ended up with McDinosaur as our candidate. He was my last pick from the firld. and I don’t honestly think he’d finish in the top 8 if he ran in an open election agaisnt other Reps. So then how does he dcome from being broke and totally out of it in 6 short months to being the candidate. I don’t know anyone who actually likes him that much as the pick for the party. All of which, makes me feel like we just got gamed again.
- If they insist on holding primaries, instead of just putting anyone who can get the necessary signitures on the ballot, then they should do away with the caucus sytem, make it illegal for either party, and just open the primaries to a National vote period. But then the party bosses couldn’t determine the outcome.
- If you think about it, one or the other psrty power blocks will effectively choose the next POTUS, That idea really pisses me off, especially because it gives the minority nutbags a way to sneak into power.
- what the fuck ever happened to majority rule in this country. Just disgusting. Because of Rep party deals made in some dark political party room somewhere, people who chose a candidate nobody likes, we could all end up under a soft Marxist Socialist. Great. Just fucking great.
Comment by RTO Trainer on 6/14 @ 6:29 pm #
The Administration made a big mistake in ever advancing the theory of Guantanamo as not-US territory. It’s an issue that should, as the rest, follow the precendents set in the Insular Cases (which SCOTUS also creatively reinterprets to their opposite conclusions just as they do Eisentrager)but it was a piling on; non-US citizens as the subjects of the laws should have been sufficient. Instead, they handed SCOTUS a red herring wich they were then able to twist into a main argument.
Comment by Mike Myers on 6/14 @ 6:32 pm #
Dogfaces Willie and Joe are smarter than five of the Supreme Court Justices.
Comment by Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) on 6/14 @ 6:37 pm #
- I don’t know about all the legal mumbo jumbo, but all these guys are lost in the forest of trees if they can’t see the dangers of handing out the nill of rights like its a box of bazooka bubble gum. If thats the best of the common sense thinking of the so called “elites” in this country, we’re all in deep shit.
- Kill a fetus, but protect a Jihadist. I think these people have a fucking death wish.
Comment by Roboc on 6/14 @ 6:43 pm #
BBH,
Jihadist became terrorist post-birth! Nishi? Bueller? Anyone?
Comment by Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) on 6/14 @ 6:48 pm #
= I’ll tell you one way we could fight back RTO. If the bastards keep playing fast and loose with the saftey of the country, just start refusing to send our kids off to fight their fucking wars.
- I never thought in my wildest dreams I’d ever say that, and I know its just what the fucking Left was trying to achieve, but if the Conservative leadership is so fucking stupid they keeping falling in these Lefturd traps, then fuck it, I’m not going to feed my family into a wood chipper if they’re just going to find ways to turn the killing fuckheads loose to do it again.
- In the end I don’t give a flying rats ass about the Progressives and their fuckeheaded theories. Peoples lives are on the line. People are dying for this shit. This isn’t some fucking class room exercise. What the fuck is the matter with these people anyway. You, and everyone of our men and women in the service that put it on the line every day just goddamn it deserve better than that.
Comment by RTO Trainer on 6/14 @ 7:07 pm #
BBH, that’d require that I avail myself of the ETS, still three years out. Even if I weren’t two years out form retirement by that point I’d still be loathe to do it.
I’m far from alone too.
Comment by Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) on 6/14 @ 7:14 pm #
- I’m not advocating it, I love my country as much, if not more, than the next guy. But I’m also not going to just shove my kids over the cliff if no one in Washington has a working brain cell anymore. Theres just no point. They got to stop running this country like a giant poli-sci theories class amusing the “elitists” for their entertainment, and get fucking serious.
- If they don’t they’re going to look up some day and there won’t be anyone left to save their fucked up heads.
Comment by The Sanity Inspector on 6/14 @ 8:05 pm #
I was listening to Weekend Edition on NPR this morning, wincing at Daniel Schorr chortling over this development. Because it’s egg on President Satan Incarnate, you see…
Comment by jon on 6/14 @ 8:07 pm #
If there isn’t evidence to hold on to those guys, then why the hell are we holding them? What are you guys afraid of?
My guesses: torture being revealed, prisoners held with no evidence, prisoners held with torture-derived evidence, prisoners who will probably not get convicted based on torture-derived evidence, and all the flak that will result from proof of torture going from the realm of “they deserved it, so who cares?” to “We did what? based on what?”
This is about a cover up, not justice. If we had evidence to convict, we would hold some trials. That we haven’t suggests that we don’t give a shit about their innocence or guilt, which I think is pretty awful, or that we don’t have untainted evidence, which is the fault of those who approved torture. Either way, torture is what this case is about. We have the prisoners, we had the untainted evidence, but we went after the slam dunk and fucked up. Heckuva job, gentlemen.
Comment by Karl on 6/14 @ 8:13 pm #
jon, per usual, starting from the wrong premise, then leaping to talking points.
Q: In what war have we needed evidence to hold onto alien prisoners?
Comment by Karl on 6/14 @ 8:15 pm #
Coming this Fall — CSI: Mosul.
Comment by jon on 6/14 @ 8:22 pm #
A: This one.
Wrong premise? Habeas corpus is a legal way to say, “Why am I being held?” I think my leaps from there to talking points address that in a coherent manner, considering my contention that if we had solid evidence to try these guys, we would have by now. What explains the delay? Not enough military lawyers? Not enough military judges? Too many procedural delays from the legal-beagle defendants? It’s time to put up or shut up, and so far all I’ve seen is a legal clusterfuck.
Also, if Guantanamo is Cuban territory, then McCain can’t be President since he was born in Panama.
Comment by Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) on 6/14 @ 8:24 pm #
- The dead-endes, coward fucks that they are, surrender monkeys need this to be a police action, not a war, so they can run this kind of shit. In a justice based world it would be the fucktard left that are fighting against our country who would get to stand and watch their wives and kids die, just before they got their traitor ass heads cut off. Keep talking Lefturds. Your day is coming.
Comment by maggie katzen on 6/14 @ 8:26 pm #
erm, his parents weren’t American citizens?
Comment by Christopher Taylor on 6/14 @ 8:26 pm #
Doesn’t matter what we say. The republic is collapsing and its from a cause nobody in the past had ever envisioned: the judicial department became a tyranny, not by their usurpation of the usual reins of power, but by capitulation from an ethically adrift and critically thinking-impaired public and leadership. In a democracy, if the people become uneducated and abandon reason for emotion, so does the leadership and government.
my contention that if we had solid evidence to try these guys, we would have by now.
Has it ever occurred to you that the evidence we’re holding them on is, you know, classified? In any case, why this war do we have to prove we are holding POWs and non uniformed combattants, saboteurs, terrorists, and spies? Don’t answer, that was a rhetorical question – the kind that’s meant to make you shut up and think. If you dare.
Comment by The Sanity Inspector on 6/14 @ 8:30 pm #
jon,
Recall how we went the Perry Mason route after the first WTC bombing. During the legal proceedings against some of the terrorists, the government was forced to disclose how it was eavesdropping on OBL’s cellphone, whereupon he dropped off our radar. If that’s an urban legend please correct me.
Comment by maggie katzen on 6/14 @ 8:32 pm #
hey, S.I. don’t forget Lynn Stewart.
Comment by Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) on 6/14 @ 8:36 pm #
- The Left isn’t kidding anybody. they need this war to be over to beat the historic odds. The only thing they give a shit about is getting back in power. Its been this way since about 2002, when someone pointed out that in our entire gistory the electorate has never changed parties in war time. They’d sell their mothers to get back in. Its that simple. they’ll do anything they can to tie our hands and stop us from protecting the country, Anything. Must be a fucking bitch to be so power starved you’d turn traitor to your own country.
Comment by SmokeVanThorn on 6/14 @ 8:42 pm #
Sanity
Don’t bother trying to explain to jon. His “A: this one” flippancy shows he’s a just a little dildo.
Comment by ahem on 6/14 @ 8:49 pm #
I see dead people.
Comment by Civilis on 6/14 @ 8:54 pm #
Anyone that thinks we need to have “beyond a reasonable doubt” level of evidence to hold a captured insurgent should be held responsible for the consequences, namely, more civilian casualties in conflicts all over the world. Rewarding people for deliberately endangering civilians by posing as civilians while fighting should be morally reprehensible to anyone.
Comment by Pablo on 6/14 @ 9:03 pm #
The Panama Canal Zone was US territory until Carter gave it away, which happens to be well after the time McCain was born there. There are 3 or 4 other qualifications that make McCain a “natural born citizen” but the fact that he was born on American soil is the best one. See the Hay-Bunau Varilla Treaty.
Nice try, though.
Comment by Karl on 6/14 @ 9:04 pm #
jon,
You did not give a serious answer to my question. I suspect the reason for that is that you don’t have one. Do not expect to be taken seriously if you cannot give a serious answer to a simple quetion.
Comment by Karl on 6/14 @ 9:07 pm #
Or perhaps I misread jon and he’s saying that this war is the first war in US history where the military must produce evidence to detain.
Comment by Karl on 6/14 @ 9:08 pm #
jon also completely missed his “wrong premise,” which I joke about at #35.
Comment by Mikey NTH on 6/14 @ 9:09 pm #
#36 jon: Why are they being held? Because they were caught in a warzone bearing arms against US troops.
Is the Supreme Court going to interject into Congress’ power to declare war from full and formal to much more limited? Historically they have avoided those kinds of questions, now they are in the full of it. This decision makes them a political branch when the courts have striven to stay away from that due to the danger to the independence of the courts.
This will have repercussions on the relationship of the three branches that we cannot yet see, and that worries me, and should worry you also.
Comment by Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) on 6/14 @ 9:13 pm #
“…and should worry you also.”
- No.Hes to young and stupid to look more than a week down the road. All they know is they want to win something. Anything, and they don’t care how.
Comment by RTO Trainer on 6/14 @ 9:19 pm #
Jon,
You’re making a special effort to misrepresent the recent past or you’re relying on poos sources of information. Or you don’t know and you’re just making it up as you go along.
Why they are being held is simple to answer and requires no court. They were taken bearing arms against the United States. If you read the Geneva Conventions, you’ll learn a bit about how such people are, or must, be treated depending on the other circumstances of their having borne arms in combat.
One thing you’ll learn is that those detained this way may be held until hostilities are concluded.
Regarding recent history, the Administration has been trying for years to formulate appropriate rules and procedres for reviewing all cases of the detained. But those who ostensibly are advocating in favor of the detainees have prevented the implementation of these processes. If you wonder whose fault that it’s all taken so long you can start with the civil right groups who, I’d argue, have done far more harm than good for their “clients.”
Finally, the Constitution requires that Presidents be a “natural born Citizen.” There is no territorial requirement.
Comment by ThomasD on 6/14 @ 9:26 pm #
I’m no constitutional scholar but this strikes me as one of the greatest acts of self aggrandizment committed by a single branch of the government in quite a long time, effectively placing warfare under the auspices of the criminal judicial system. What’s next, will the military now have to mirandize detainees on the battlefield?
Comment by jon on 6/14 @ 9:30 pm #
This Gitmo mess was made by Bush when he decided to create a new type of defendant at a new type of prison in a place he thought he could make up a new type of jurisdiction. And there was the torture, too.
This mess is his creation, not a creation of leftist lawyers. He stepped into his own bucket of shit legal theory, said the trials will be fair according to some standard of his choosing, and it’s come back to bite him on the ass, because Presidents–no matter how much power they do have under the Constitution–are subject to some restraints when the Congress and/or Courts say so.
Congress is free to tell the courts to fuck off. The President can tell the Congress to fuck off. And the courts can tell the President and the Congress to fuck off. Our government is based on a well-balanced diet of “Screw you!” and that’s just how things are. If the President and Congress were to figure out a way to try these Gitmo detainees that the Courts could give the go-ahead to (or even an unenthusiastic nod,) then we can solve this mess. But since Bush and Company have no interest in exposing their torture, there’s no pressing need for them to negotiate a way to try those detainees.
Comment by Darleen on 6/14 @ 9:35 pm #
This Gitmo mess was made by Bush when he decided to create a new type of defendant
Jaysus FUCK… I feel like I’m playing whack-a-mole with the leftwing stupid brigade. THIS IS NOT NEW
do your homework, jon!
Comment by jon on 6/14 @ 9:37 pm #
The notion that all of the detainees at Guantanamo were captured armed on a battlefield is bullshit. Some were delivered to US forces, some were captured in their hideouts in Pakistan (Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was not a rifleman,) and others were captured under other circumstances. Really, if you’re going to accuse me of ignoring facts, they should be actual facts.
And if they were caught on a battlefield, with a gun, by US forces, then please tell me how a Habeas Corpus response will jeopardize national security. Please. Pretty please.
Comment by RTO Trainer on 6/14 @ 9:39 pm #
You’re still failing history Jon.
Comment by Darleen on 6/14 @ 9:40 pm #
jon
alien enemy combatants aren’t entitled to habeas.
Please please link ONE US legal precedent where this was held true.
The Supreme Five have abbrogated war powers to themselves.
UNPRECEDENTED.
Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates - UMBA on 6/14 @ 9:41 pm #
you’re relying on poos sources of information.
RTO, I realize that this was typo, but it was a great one nonetheless.
Comment by RTO Trainer on 6/14 @ 9:42 pm #
Jon, if you have knowledge or evidence of torture, you have a duty to come forward with it. If you don’t know to whom to take it, I’d be happy to help.
Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates - UMBA on 6/14 @ 9:42 pm #
jon, can you explain to us the legal distinction between “pirate” and “privateer”? Did Bush invent those categories as well?
Comment by RTO Trainer on 6/14 @ 9:43 pm #
SBP–
heh.
Comment by Pablo on 6/14 @ 9:43 pm #
Karl,
That was my read of it, to which my only response is: Why?
Comment by TmjUtah on 6/14 @ 9:43 pm #
Somebody please print the cite from Geneva dealing with “unlawful combatants” for Jon.
I’m at the very end of my string. I decline to be nice where willful ignorance and not honest stupidity is the problem.
This has political ramifications far beyond our happy forum.
Comment by ThomasD on 6/14 @ 9:45 pm #
(Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was not a rifleman,)
Bone jarringly stupid in it’s simplicty, that one.
Comment by maggie katzen on 6/14 @ 9:46 pm #
no, no, no, because um, those court drawing you saw this week were, um, completely made up.
Comment by JHoward on 6/14 @ 9:46 pm #
You know, #54 isn’t a bad post, jon, at least in terms of plain English, something that befuddles our other trolls.
So take it back to the top, and the topic of this thread: Is Beldar right or wrong? That DC is the eternal trainwreck it is isn’t really the core of the issue, is it?
Comment by JHoward on 6/14 @ 9:49 pm #
Jeff, #11 really should be a tee shirt or bumper sticker or something. Brilliant. Maybe a little pw side venture.
(In fact, about nine-tenths of your themes could be. Just a thought…)
Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates - UMBA on 6/14 @ 9:50 pm #
Somebody please print the cite from Geneva dealing with “unlawful combatants†for Jon.
As it happens, I just cited the section that defines a lawful combatant over in another thread.
Art 4. A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:
(1) Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict, as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.
(2) Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:[
(a) that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
(b) that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
(c) that of carrying arms openly;
(d) that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
Terrorists don't appear to meet any of those conditions.
Darleen posted a great link to a lengthy discussion of the topic from an American Bar Association task force.
Jon, if he's intellectually honest (which I doubt), will admit that he's completely mistaken about Bush "creat[ing] a new type of defendant”.
We’ll see, won’t we?
Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates - UMBA on 6/14 @ 9:51 pm #
Darleen’s link didn’t come through. Let’s try it again.
Comment by Ric Locke on 6/14 @ 9:51 pm #
Bullshit, jon.
The mess was created by Bush, all right. The historical way — the correct way, according to centuries of precedent as well as the Geneva and Hague Conventions — was and is to hold an informal hearing consisting of asking the soldiers involved what went on, then either letting the captives go, turning them over to allies for various reasons, or shooting them out of hand, with the presumptions strongly biased in favor of the latter alternative.
Bush tried for a more humane alternative. Given that the abbreviated procedures inevitable in the confusion of battle were and are likely to sweep up the innocent with the guilty, he wanted something a little more leisurely, which would enable nicer distinctions. To be fair to your moonbat talking points, he also expected at least a little in the way of intelligence from interrogating them. This procedure has now been declared invalid.
The military will adapt. In fact, in large part they already have — how many people have been added to Guantanamó since you guys brewed up this controversy? Do you really suppose the military haven’t encountered anyone behaving similarly in the last three years or so? You might consider that in the light of the older procedure.
Consider also that the decision, as a byproduct:
–Invalidates every Status of Forces Agreement now in place.
–Abrogates the Geneva Conventions.
–Extends US law to cover the world, a level of imperialism the Brits never attempted.
And it’s a good thing George Bush isn’t vindictive. If he were as irritated as I am, he would give each of those guys a new suit and $100,000, and release them in the International concourse of terminal A at JFK. Hilarity would ensue…
Regards,
Ric
Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates - UMBA on 6/14 @ 9:52 pm #
Jeff, #11 really should be a tee shirt or bumper sticker or something. Brilliant. Maybe a little pw side venture.
I agree.
What about a zombie Constitution, or a Highlander Constitution?
Comment by Pablo on 6/14 @ 9:53 pm #
True. If I remember the video of Danny Pearl’s beheading correctly, KSM preferred to work with a knife…and a bound victim. He really wasn’t interested in a trial then, and he’s not really interested in one now, though he’s getting one anyway.
Comment by ThomasD on 6/14 @ 9:55 pm #
After all, had KSM actually been toting a rifle, in uniform, conducting himself under an organized and identifiable command structure, then – of course – he would be a prisoner of war, would not have access to US courts, and could be detained for the duration of hostilities with no further recourse.
But no, instead he conducts his jihad in a manner specifically proscribed by the laws of war, so therefore, as per our black robed overlords, he naturally is accorded greater rights than any lawful enemy combatant.
Comment by Mikey NTH on 6/14 @ 9:58 pm #
jaysus – pirates again? Wasn’t that argument played out sometime last Monday night? I think my memory is still holding up.
Comment by jon on 6/14 @ 9:58 pm #
JHoward, Beldar is a stupid, overreaching decision based on a stupid, overreaching situation based on a stupid, overreaching power-grab that would have been better played by a few simple steps that didn’t involve the creation of a quasi-US-held legal playground where Bush gets to be in charge and detainees have no freaking hope of getting anything resembling actual justice. Not to mention that the way this has played out, no one could get justice: not you, not me, not those bastards who deserve it. And definitely not anyone who just got picked up for the bounty money in Afghanistan, a country where being dirt-poor is something a few generations have aspired to.
Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates - UMBA on 6/14 @ 9:59 pm #
(b) that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
To my understanding, an orange armband, or a mohawk haircut, or a ballet tutu, would be enough. The idea is to be immediately distinguishable as a combatant, right?
Unfortunately, a turban and a beard aren’t enough.
I mention this because I’ve seen people like jon argue that these guys “can’t afford uniforms”, but that’s not what the GC requires. It requires a distinctive mark of some kind. Doesn’t have to be a conventional uniform.
Comment by JHoward on 6/14 @ 10:00 pm #
^^ Define “justice”, jon. Please.
Comment by JHoward on 6/14 @ 10:02 pm #
IOW, what part of #71 has you stumped, jon? I realize unintended consequences plague the short-one-dimension lump that resides on the typical leftist brainpan, but come on.
Comment by JHoward on 6/14 @ 10:04 pm #
IOOW, BDR. Seriously. Because logic just failed you, jon.
Comment by JHoward on 6/14 @ 10:08 pm #
IOOOW, suggest you pack a nice bag lunch, jon, and head on over to G. to test the (1) security measures of said “quasi-US-held playground”, and (2) to see if they’d waterboard your ass. I mean, for want of all the naked pyramids and all.
Comment by RTO Trainer on 6/14 @ 10:12 pm #
Jon,
Now you are failing reading comprehension as well.
Beldar is not a decision. He’s a blogger–a person.
And this:
…just proves that you are so wedded to your talking points and crib sheets that you can’t even take the time to check on what you’ve been told, much less present an argument against it.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 6/14 @ 10:26 pm #
Uh, jon, you *do* realize the people held at Gitmo have been through hearings assessing the evidence against them? And that Congress passed laws establishing the tribunal they were going to be tried under, and removed them from the civilian courts’ jurisdiction?
Anyone know if that happened during this Congress or last? My memory says it was this Congress, but my memory ain’t what it used to be.
Comment by Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) on 6/14 @ 10:28 pm #
“…actual justice”
- Actual justice. You wouldn’t know actual jutice if it bit you on the ass. Your an ideolog, arguing poli-sci theories, most of which have been pumped into your immature impressionable mind by people that hate this country. But isn’t it oh so kewl to stick it to the man. You’re an intellectual fly weight, just like most of your brethren.
- Actual justice, the kind practiced in his part of the world, he’d have been brought before a group of opposing thugs and murderers, his competitors, and had his head handed to him.
- You’re a fucking child, playing in an adult world. God help you, if you ever have to deal with real life, up close and personal.
Comment by Karl on 6/14 @ 10:34 pm #
Still the wrong premise. The pre-9/11 mindset is strong with this one.
Comment by Karl on 6/14 @ 10:37 pm #
Also note that jon still has no serious answer to my first question. And is afraid to agree with my interpretation of his flip answer. What he has is talking points. With every boilerplate comment that is non-responsive to points others raise, he is proving his inability to actually debate the issue.
Comment by Karl on 6/14 @ 10:43 pm #
Nathan Hale.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 6/14 @ 10:49 pm #
It’s just possible that his parents considered very carefully before conceiving him. Isn’t it?
Comment by Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) on 6/14 @ 10:51 pm #
- SecProggs/Lefturds, or whatever they’re calling themselves this week, never debate. They parrot whatever they been fed, and then disappear.
Comment by Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) on 6/14 @ 10:54 pm #
- Folks. Its pretty obvious we have a serious problem in this country and I don’t honestly know what the answer is. You can’t kill people or throw them in prison for being young and stupid.
- Like I said earlier. I don’t give a rats ass if they want to commit suicide themselves, but I sure as hell have know intention of joining them.
Comment by maggie katzen on 6/14 @ 10:56 pm #
maybe he’s from France.
Comment by Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) on 6/14 @ 11:02 pm #
- No. Not France. If he was from France he would have suggested we surrender to the defendants.
Comment by maggie katzen on 6/14 @ 11:04 pm #
pssst, BBH. *
Comment by Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) on 6/14 @ 11:06 pm #
- Hmmmm. Maybe thats why he was so familiar with the name Beldar.
Comment by Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) on 6/14 @ 11:08 pm #
- Sometimes I fear for the future of our Republic. But mostly I just want to clock one of these assholes.
Comment by Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) on 6/14 @ 11:13 pm #
- “Know” for no. I must be getting old.
Comment by Sean M. on 6/15 @ 4:08 am #
If it wasn’t so late, I might try to come up with a “mass quantities of jihad” joke.
Comment by The Lost Dog on 6/15 @ 4:12 am #
Jon,
You are a stupid fucking moron. There are no two ways about it. You are your own worst enemy, and too “cool” to see reality.
Let me take a guess, here.
You are fourteen years old, right? Your stupidity is an affront to anyone with an IQ of over 80.
Do you really think that anyone here hasn’t been where you are, at one point in their lives?
The difference is that reality has struck most of the people here. Go back to KosKids, where fantasies of “I Love you, man” are the main topic every day. You do not belong on a blog of realists with rational skills. You need to be somewhere that denies the realities of this world.
Cool, baby! Can’t win at the ballot box? No sweat. SCOTUS to the rescue of those who think freedom is free, and that America is full of greeedy pigs. You are so stupid, that there are bo words for it.
You are in for quite a shock in the not too distant future. I wish I could see your face when you finally get what you are praying for. It ain’t gonna be pretty, and you ain’t gonna be happy AT ALL…
And BBH –
I don’t think I have ever been more pissed off, or more frightened by the shit that is goung down in DC…
Comment by Cave Bear on 6/15 @ 7:09 am #
Even though that douchenozzle Jon was well and truly bitch slapped by all and sundry, you can bet it all went in one ear, propagated across a VERY hard vacuum, and out the other. He’s probably back with the KozKidz or DUmmies, wanking his little peepee, bragging about how he showed those e-vil cryptofascists at PW who is best.
Sigh.
I think I would go one better than Ric on what to do with the Gitmo prisoners. Instead of JFK, I’d give them that new suit and 100 large, but let them loose in the downtown areas of New York, Boston, Seattle, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Washington, D.C.(!) and other such high concentrations of leftist cocksuckers like Jon and those five shit-for-brains SC justices.
And then watch the hilarity ensue. Oh yes, I’d pay good money to see that…
Comment by Christopher Taylor on 6/15 @ 8:58 am #
I just watched the movie Idiocracy (which I highly recommend) and internet trolls and leftist fools are well portrayed in the movie, painfully so. Part of the reason the movie works so well is that you can see society slouching into this future.
Comment by SarahW on 6/15 @ 9:25 am #
I would just like to make a little comment about the “pre-9/11 mindset”. I was a bit of a Cassandra on that one. All summer of 2001, I couldn’t shut up about why doesn’t someone DO something about the Taliban, as they not only had it in for every ideal of Western Civ, but were plainly fucking evil on every possible level. The terror and mayhem they were wreaking on the populace, was everything evil and opressive and anti-life as could possibly be, from hatred of music and valentines to throwing rugs over once-free women hitting them with sticks for stepping outside, insisting on men papering over their windows lest a woman’s face see daylight – who never tired of finding new encroachments on any peace or happiness discovered. Blowing up any ancient sign of the once grand Afghan civilisation were enough for me, to say “go in and STOP THEM. Throw in stated goals to establish Islam like that everywhere, and stamp out knowlege and freedom wherevever it might be.. I pronounced “you have to stamp that sort of thing out…that’s insanity, they are madmen, and dangerous in the extreme.” But it seemed not to be enough to anyone else what they were and what they were doing there. And I was right. And I’m angry that the oh-so elevated peace love and understanding crowd do not admit the evil that existed there, nor the admission that in the modern age that evil can come across the ocean and touch us. And did. But they don’t see the mission, the aim, the evil that needs to be wiped off the face of the earth. No, we are evil for not pretending these noble savages are reacting to the oppression by a three thousand little Eichmans stopping their parade of destruction of history, of knowlege, liberty, and self-government, of all the beauty life itself has to offer. How dreadful we “brutalize” these madmen into submission.
Comment by jon on 6/15 @ 9:35 am #
As a fourteen-year-old fucking moron with a death wish for my country and a small peepee and a whole lot of other things (playdates with Kos, beaver shots of Garofalo, and a bottle of mineral water, perhaps? come on! be creative,) I still have to confess that this Supreme Court decision doesn’t scare me. Since I work at a prison and see all sorts of actual criminals in orange jumpsuits on a daily basis (hell, I’ve fired convicted murderers from high-paying 50-cent-an-hour jobs and had the mentally ill in my face telling me there will be consequences if I don’t copy their legal work by their alleged deadline,) I know a bit more about the process than most of you. It involves people under the custody of a government saying “What for?” and a court answering “Because you are a low-life, jackass.” Occasionally, it leads to a reopening of a case, some perusal over some evidence, or some recalculation of a sentence. But even in the rare cases where the government if found to have a completely fucked up case, inmates don’t just walk away the next day with a pocketful of cash. Unless the military tribunals are as completely fucked up as the people at Democratic Underground (which I don’t read, so I’m trusting you guys’ assessment here) say they are, the courts will just peruse some cases, establish some standards, and make things as fair as Bush once said he would (thanks for that ABA link, Darleen.)
As to all the other questions, in no particular order:
1. Yes, there was torture.
2. Habeas is a human right.
3. Bush doesn’t get a full pass to do what he wants just because one of the alternatives is to shoot people.
4. You’re right, shooting bad guys isn’t so bad. Especially since the ones we don’t shoot might talk without being tortured.
5. I do not eat poo.
6. I am not from Mars,or Second City.
7. Douches are not something I associate with.
8. Unless you speak French, in which case I do, unlike the French.
9. If you want me to admit that having foreigners clog our courts is a problem, then you got me. It is a problem. But if you think that it will lead to anything other than most of them getting told to fuck off, then that’s Bush’s problem. If this turns out to be any more of a clusterfuck, then that can be another part of his stellar legacy.
10. Happy Father’s Day.
Comment by Roboc on 6/15 @ 9:43 am #
Congratulations, you’re qualified to be a community organizer!
Comment by Pablo on 6/15 @ 9:44 am #
Uh, no. This case gives each and every one of them the right to challenge their detention in federal court. This has nothing to do with the tribunals. This is a key to the civilian courts for every last Tom, Dick and Achmed at Gitmo.
On what grounds could a civilian court now deny a habeas petition? Hint: They can’t.
Comment by McGeheeâ„¢ on 6/15 @ 9:44 am #
Jon, you know about the process at corr4ectional facilities. As you have been told repeatedly, Gitmo is not a correctional facility.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 6/15 @ 9:46 am #
TMI, jon. Way TMI.
Comment by Darleen on 6/15 @ 9:50 am #
jon
So you work at a prison. So do I, after ten years at a DA office. I lay you odds I know more about the criminal justice system then you do, so listen up carefully
In a war, lawful combatants do NOT have access to civilian courts and unlawfull combatants MAY have access but cannot claim access as a “right”. Certainly unlawful alien combatants captured on the battlefield can even be summarily executed – that is a LAWFUL option by the captors. I’ve linked above to the study by the American Bar Association of all the legal precedents concerning MILITARY COMMISSIONS. Under the section dealing with the jurisdiction of military commissions to try jihadists:
You embarrass me by your assertion that your (limited) knowledge of civilian criminal court system because you work in a prison makes you an expert on the law of war.
Pingback by NEWS & OPINION ROUNDUP (15 JUNE 2008) "BABY DADDY DAY" EDITION | Democrat=Socialist on 6/15 @ 10:02 am #
[...] to the RSS Feed.Powered by Bookmarkify™ More »Like we didn’t see this coming like an HIV infected Rhino. Thanks Filthy Five, you may have done us a big [...]
Comment by N. O'Brain on 6/15 @ 10:05 am #
“The choice is not between order and liberty. It is between liberty with order and anarchy without either. There is a danger that, if the Court does not temper its doctrinaire logic with a little practical wisdom, it will convert the constitutional Bill of Rights into a suicide pact.â€Â
–Justice Robert H. Jackson
Terminiello v. City of Chicago, 337 U.S. 1, 37 (1949)
Comment by N. O'Brain on 6/15 @ 10:11 am #
“Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates – UMBA on 6/14 @ 9:59 pm #
(b) that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
To my understanding, an orange armband, or a mohawk haircut, or a ballet tutu, would be enough. The idea is to be immediately distinguishable as a combatant, right?”
IIRC, the French underground rose up against the Nazi occupiers.
BUT, they wore armbands with the Cross of Lorraine on thenm.
That was enough to make them legal combatants.
Comment by RTO Trainer on 6/15 @ 10:22 am #
Yes, there was torture.
Not the question; but thanks for clarifying.
Since you now state that you have knowledge or evidence of acts of torture taking or having taken place, you have a duty to report it. Please contact me by e-mail and I’ll help you get that infomation to those who will use it to investigate and punish the perpetrators.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 6/15 @ 10:24 am #
Just a guess here, RTO, but you ain’t gonna hear shit.
Comment by jon on 6/15 @ 10:28 am #
I never claimed to be an expert at the law, just that I have some knowledge of what happens with most Habeas cases: they get tossed out of court just like they should. If that’s a claim to expertise, then I’m sorry to have stepped on your toes. But I didn’t think it was.
As to Gitmo not being a correctional facility, I agree. But it is a place where people are held, and–like a correctional facility–some of those held will question why and (according to the Supreme Court in this case) have a right to an answer. If that is the downfall of the United States, then I guess I’m going to have to go down with the 5 rather than the 4 on this one.
Comment by jon on 6/15 @ 10:58 am #
RTO, the government admitted to using waterboarding, stress positions, and a host of other things that come under the heading of “torture”. You can argue that they didn’t happen, but you’d be naive. You can argue that they aren’t torture, which is not naive but won’t get you far. Or you can argue that the government is making it all up to sound tough (like Saddam and his WMDs) and the prisoners are playing along for sympathy. But if you really don’t think any torture happened, then just say so. Hiding behind government secrets when they’ve already been blown is just kind of stupid seeming, however.
Comment by Darleen on 6/15 @ 10:59 am #
jon
The only “rights” the detainees in Gitmo have (or should have) is that already guaranteed by legal precedence according to law of war/UCMJ/Geneva Conventions. What SCOTUS has done is unprecedented. The five have invented a right to unlawful combatants for access to civilian courts, when military commissions have jurisdiction. And it is unprecedented that the inventing-new-rights 5 ignored that the Legislative branch had already stripped SCOTUS of their jurisdiction in this case. That is breathtaking and alarming. 5 American justices who are acting like mullahs.
Comment by Darleen on 6/15 @ 11:17 am #
I never claimed to be an expert at the law, just that I have some knowledge of what happens
You claimed you knew more about the [civilian] criminal justice system than everybody else here.
You are wrong. Even your limited knowledge is in the wrong arena. This is about jurisdiction between civilian and military and about how the judicial branch of government executed a small scale coup d’etat.
Comment by McGeheeâ„¢ on 6/15 @ 11:26 am #
And what we’re saying is, the Court is wrong because the fact Gitmo is not a correctional facility, is more important than whatever superficial characteristics it may share with one.
Comment by jon on 6/15 @ 11:35 am #
“I know a bit more about the process than most of you” is hardly the claim you say it is, Darleen. I said where my knowledge derived, qualified it with a sort of “What’s your worry?” flippantry, and remain unconvinced that this is the death knell of America.
And if the Congress wants to impeach those five, let them at it. The Court decided that those military commissions have to allow for Habeas Corpus filings, not that the defendants get the same rights as every civilian citizen of the US. In the end, those held have the right to question why they are held, then sent before a military tribunal to be tried for it. If that’s the end of a Republic and the introduction of a Tyrant, then I’d rather have a Caesar of 5 judges than one who is willing to indefinitely hold people without presenting evidence.
Comment by McGeheeâ„¢ on 6/15 @ 11:40 am #
We’ve been watching the courts execute these coups d’etat for generations now. I agree this one isn’t the death knell for America. The echoes of that knell died away long ago.
Comment by B Moe on 6/15 @ 11:50 am #
….not that the defendants get the same rights as every civilian citizen of the US.
What legal rights are they being denied?
Comment by ushie on 6/15 @ 12:00 pm #
Waterboarding? Stress positions?
What, no woodchippers? We really suck at torture, and that is now a big concern to me; thanks, jon, for giving me a new cause.
Comment by B Moe on 6/15 @ 12:16 pm #
In the end, those held have the right to question why they are held, then sent before a military tribunal to be tried for it.
Upon rereading this, I really don’t think jon understands the ruling. Seriously, dude, you need to study up on this thing and try to understand all the implications.
Comment by jon on 6/15 @ 12:34 pm #
I do have one major apology to make: the case is Boumedienne, not (as I ridiculously and carelessly assumed) Beldar. Apologies all around, especially to Mr. Beldar. I had read a summary, but totally goofed on the case’s name and have no excuse other than my own laziness.
Now: pounce!
Comment by Gray on 6/15 @ 12:39 pm #
Since I work at a prison and see all sorts of actual criminals in orange jumpsuits on a daily basis…. I know a bit more about the process than most of you.
The civilian criminal judicial process…..
You know fuck-all about the Law of Land Warfare as prescribed by the Geneva and Hague conventions.
Under those conventions, you are not allowed to try POWs in civilian courts for actions on the battlefield. These guys do not, and never have qualified to be taken POW.
My Geneva Convention ID card says “Category II” what does Khalid Mohammed’s card say?
The stupid SCOTUS decision amounts to: “Well, you guys can shoot them summarily in accordance with the Geneva Convention, but you can’t hold them and you can’t question them.”
I’m a soldier: Do you think they send us over there to arrest people and send them to the pokey?
Comment by JHoward on 6/15 @ 12:40 pm #
This decision doesn’t scare me either, jon, partly because we’re both real sonsabitches I’m sure, but mostly because there are plenty of workarounds. None of BDR victims grasp, apparently, but then they, like you, evidently don’t grasp what stuff like this really means.
Because I’d wager you, like thousands of other malcontents, probably do suffer from BDR. You take this as the newswires do, not as a chilling implication for the reason and order of actual constitutional justice, against which it is a bullshit decision, but because it throws sand in BushCo’s face. That’s my read of you, and like I say, thousands like you.
It’s a dangerous POV.
Tell me, when illegal enemy combatants get, literally, better due process treatment then American citizens of particular religious intensity do, does that scare you? Conversely, when said citizens are shat on and scattered to the wind by their State and are treated thus because of a particular type of bigoted zealotry, the same basic zealotry that now applies their fundamental rights to other lands and citizens, both of them covered by previously-suitable, non-constitutional standards of military justice, does that “scare” your bad self?
There are indeed workarounds. But there is no workaround for the fundamental malaise that turns constitutional reason on its head — and Democrats have never failed to shriek about constitutionality. And so far I’m thinking that’s pretty much what happened here.
Comment by Gray on 6/15 @ 12:54 pm #
Judge Kennedy’s statement in the ruling:
“Within the Constitution’s separation-of-powers structure, few exercises of judicial power are as legitimate or as necessary as the responsibility to hear challenges to the authority of the Executive to imprison a person,” Kennedy wrote. He was joined by Justices John Paul Stevens, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer.”
Translation:
“I don’t give a shit about the Geneva Convention or the Law of Land Warfare…. I don’t give a shit about the fact we are at war…. I don’t give a shit about previous rulings and cases…. I don’t give a shit about legal vs illegal combatants, and I definitely don’t give a shit about terrorism. I saw a chance to sucker-punch the Executive Branch and I took it. Wat’chu gonna do bitchez!?”
Where others saw distinct conflicts and questions on terrorists and the Law of Land Warfare, he saw an internecine Constitutional fight entirely within the beltway and he ruled to advance the power of the court in that internecine feud. Fucker….
Comment by Gray on 6/15 @ 1:10 pm #
Scalia called the judiciary “the branch that knows least about . . . national security concerns” and penned the darkest line of the court’s 126 pages of back-and-forth: “It will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed.”
I guess Kennedy thinks that is a small price to pay to increase the unaccountable power of The Judiciary.
Comment by Christopher Taylor on 6/15 @ 1:26 pm #
Due process is not a human right, justice is a human right, the process is based on that right. However, like all rights, we deny free exercise of those rights if the person in question is so destructive to society or damaging to their fellow man that they must be restrained and possibly put to death.
Comment by Darleen on 6/15 @ 1:36 pm #
The innocent ask for justice, the guilty demand mercy
Comment by Rob Crawford on 6/15 @ 2:03 pm #
None of which actually are torture. If you honestly believe water boarding is torture, are you pressing to have the folks who water board each other in the street to protest water boarding arrested? What about the use of water boarding in training?
And, besides, do you know how many people have been water boarded at Gitmo?
It’s part of the al’Qaeda training manual to claim torture when held; they’re perfectly willing to lie about that and to exaggerate the least discomfort into “torture”. That makes it hard to take their claims seriously.
Comment by Gray on 6/15 @ 3:21 pm #
Hey, where is the jerk-off union prison screw who proposed to lecture soldiers and former-soldiers about the Laws of Ground Warfare?
Comment by Rusty on 6/15 @ 4:14 pm #
Directed at jon. First of all this is a war. There is no presumtion of fair in a war. In the not-too-disatnt past these people would never had made it to a detention facility. In any other than a western society they are still simply shooting,(or worse) prisoners. The supreme court has just made sure that a unit commander will think twice before taking prisoners.Way to cut the legs out from under the commander in chief SCOTUS. Assholes.
Comment by RTO Trainer on 6/15 @ 4:15 pm #
The interrogation techniques you mention do not come under the heading of torture. However, if you wish to make a case that they do, that should be relatively simple.You have but to offer up any given legal definintion to which the US is a party (anything from treaty to US Code) that defines torture to include these techniques.
Thank, you, however, for admiting, however obliquely, that you have no knowledge of any specific indicents of torture. I’d caution that making statements that indicate or imply otherwise though, is pretty irresponsible and potentially frought with consequence.
Comment by RTO Trainer on 6/15 @ 4:24 pm #
Jon,
I’ll concede your point on the scope of this decision if you cna point to any other case in history where battlefield detainees, of whatever type or category, have ever, anywhere, in any conflict, had access to the civilain courts of their captors, much less the rights of the citizens of that detaining nation.
It would also be nice if you would conceed the lack of precedent for the Court to overturn provisions of the Constitution itself. Th Exception cluse makes the defintion of the jurisdiction of the Courts the sole province of the Congress through legislation. Yet this decision ignores that and rules that the Courts do indeed have jurisdiction on Habeas Corpus for these enemy alines despite the legislative intente and explicit wording to the contrary.
I could see not being overly concerned by the former, but the latter should make every American quake.
Comment by Christopher Taylor on 6/15 @ 7:26 pm #
I notice that every time some leftist crank brings up Gitmo and complains about the law, they conspicuously avoid military history or any sort of legal precedent and whether or not the courts have the slightest jurisdiction in the case. They just presume that courts decide all because they are the god emperors, there is no place they have not power, there is no concept they cannot adjudicate and every single ruling is the final word on the case. They worship the courts more than radical Muslims worship Allah.
Comment by Rusty on 6/16 @ 9:48 am #
#134
I’m reminded of the band of nazi spies that were put ashore by submarine on the east coast of the US in 1943. All were captured. All were tried in camera. All were executed. Yet the current crop of proggs seem to think that terrorists should be accorded citizenship treatment.
Comment by RTO Trainer on 6/16 @ 10:58 am #
Rusty. That’s Ex party Quirin, which was a major precedent in Eisentrager which has also been overturned by Boumedienne.
Comment by RTO Trainer on 6/16 @ 12:07 pm #
Ex parte Quirin, rather.
Comment by Rusty on 6/16 @ 1:04 pm #
Thanks RTO. It’s getting to the point that each unit has to have it’s own legal council. Menken was right.