A basic flaw in the decisions is that the court grants illegal combatants rights that legal combatants would not have.
If "illegal combatants" have the right of habeus corpus, why don't prisoners-of-war?
A simply astounding decision, whose only rational reason for being is not borne out of a concern for Constitutional liberties, but simply in order to hamstring the military and the Commander-in-Chief.
Which right is that?
See number 35. Justice Scalia agrees with your take.