“Court: ‘Dirty Bomb’ Suspect Can Be Held”:
A federal appeals court Friday sided with the Bush administration and reversed a judge’s order that the government charge or free “dirty bomb” suspect Jose Padilla.
A three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the president has the authority to detain a U.S. citizen closely associated with al Qaida.
Notes Bryan Preston at JunkYardBlog, “Of course he does. Congress explicitly gave him that authority shortly after 9-11.”
This is a rather significant victory for the Administration, and, should it hold up, will prove to be an invaluable victory for any future Administration that fights the GWOT.
I’m happy with all such cases being put to review, but we simply cannot wait for a terrorist with known connections to the group who has declared war on the US to commit an act that he can be “charged with” before we detain him. His having joined up with those who’ve declared war on us is enough, I should think, that it is wise to remove him from circulation for a bit.
BINGO!
/neocon
But, then, they’re going to have to lock up most of the lefties – which is fine by me.
BUT WHERE ARE WE GOING TO GET THE ROOM IN THE JAILS? THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN FORESEEN BY THE ADMINSITRATION!
And who knows? Maybe someday there will be an honest-to-God prosecution for treason.
Assuming, of course, that behavior such as that of, say, a Lynne Stewart type person is deemed to constitute levying war against us, or adhering to our enemies, giving them aid and comfort.
Naaah… it’ll never happen.
TW: faith: “… bearing true faith and allegiance to the same….”
Well Jeff, how does that happen if you don’t get charged? That’s the whole problem here: you have to trust the military not to make a mistake of identity (it’s happened, you know—that guy in Orgeon with the matching fingerprints). If a certain swarthy-looking young man from Denver gets picked up because he looks exactly like a known terrorist, is he SOL? Do we trust the military to detect and promptly admit such mistakes, without the safeguard right of judicial review? I agree that terrorists should not be given the whole panoply of due process (in order to tip off their buddies to our methods), but couldn’t we at least have some sort of probable cause preliminary proceeding just to make sure we’ve got the right guy?
The guy from Oregon is free, no?
Jim—yes, but he was arrested and given due process by civilian (non-military) law enforcement. (The exact procedure is not clear, because he was being held as a “material wotness.”)
[…] Quiet victories […]