Supreme Court Blocks Guantanamo Bay War-Crimes Trials (SCOTUS rules against President)

Fox News & AP ^ | June 29, 2006

[pabianice]

Breaking...

---

Update:

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that President Bush overstepped his authority in ordering military war crimes trials for Guantanamo Bay detainees, a rebuke to the administration and its aggressive anti-terror policies.

Justice John Paul Stevens wrote the opinion, which said the proposed trials were illegal under U.S. law and Geneva conventions.

The case focused on Salim Ahmed Hamdan, a Yemeni who worked as a body guard and driver for Usama bin Laden. Hamdan, 36, has spent four years in the U.S. prison at Guantanamo...

Excerpt. Read more at: Fox News

[pabianice]

Court rules president overstepped his authority in trying terrorists held at Gitmo... more...

[goodnesswins]

The Chief Justice RECUSED himself!

[IMRight]

The Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that President Bush did not have authority to set up the war crimes tribunals at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and found the "military commissions" illegal under both military justice law and the Geneva convention.

[CholeraJoe]

How many soldiers does the Supreme Court have?

[pissant]

Bad news. The SCOTUS f****d up, BIG TIME.

[Jrabbit]

So, what happens now?

[Dog]

There you have it...

[IMRight]

The Chief Justice RECUSED himself!

He had to. It was his decision they were ruling on.

[Ron in Acreage]

What an outrage. Big win for democrats.

[Vision]

I don't like lawyers.

[freedumb2003]

You beat me by 15 seconds or so!

[pabianice]

SCOTUS rules:

1. President had no authority to set-up military commissions without Congressional approval.

2. May have violated Geneva Convention

3. SCOTUS has authority to rule on this case

[Halfmanhalfamazing]

How were the individual justices divided?

[Bikers4Bush]

Great, just frigging great.

[goodnesswins]

Yes.....and that's probably why it went the way it did....so sad....

[pabianice]

Kennedy reportedly sided with the four Leftists on the Court.

[Dog]

found the "military commissions" illegal under both military justice law and the Geneva convention.

Yes ...but they are not covered by the Geneva convention.

[chadwimc]

Hallelujah!!! Let's chain the moslem bastards together and then push 'em into the ocean!!!

[pissant]

Take the Gitmo prisoners and move them into the SCOTUS members neighborhood and give them welfare and food stamps too. GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

[zarf]

Well, Bush has no reason to fear the next "big one"...he's done what he can but every tool to deal with a ruthless enemy is being stripped away.

[Diogenesis]

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
George Santayana

[Constitution Day]

Damn it!!

[Rummyfan]

May have violated Geneva Convention

This seems the most outrageous..... We cannot win this war if we must rely on the Courts to fight it with us. I can't wait to hear Dr Levin tonight on this abomination.

[Jrabbit]

And the terrorists. And the lawyers. Oh! Wait!

Same thing.....you got it right.

[gakrak]

It seems to me that the idiots have just ruled on having our military never take enemy combatants prisoner again. There will be no such animal in the future. Amen.

[bnelson44]

Let's wait for the details.

[thingumbob]

All the detainees are going to be shipped back to a Country that will deal with them harshly?

And if that happens do you the detainees will want to declare asylum?

[Bikers4Bush]

From now on we should kill them all where they stand.

[khnyny]

First the eminent domain ruling, now this. Unbelievable. WTF are they thinking?

[Brilliant]

Impeach the Supreme Court.

[IMRight]

Yes ...but they are not covered by the Geneva convention.

Of course they are.

[Former Proud Canadian]

How do they figure the detainees are covered under the Geneva convention?

[Dog]

Screw the DEMS...the American people got screwed here....what the hell do we do with people caught on the battlefield?

[pepperhead]

2. May have violated Geneva Convention

May have? Many of the people caught were not wearing a uniform.

[LikeLight]

Important to wait for details . . . MSM reported Texas redistricting decision the other day as win for Dems at first . . . turned out to be the opposite . . .

[atomicpossum]

Okay. No more prisoners.

Leave them dead on the battlefield.

[pabianice]

Court: "These are not prisoners of war and thus immune from military prosecution" ... WTF??

[IMRight]

Yes.....and that's probably why it went the way it did....so sad....

It would have still been 5-4.

[areafiftyone]

Oh man this is going to make all the Bush hating leftists and the Bush hating media drool with glee! DAMN!!!

[Ron in Acreage]

Right on. Take no prisoners!

[Dog]

No they are not....they are freaking TERRORISTS.

[TomGuy]

FNS

Opinion being read on SC bench currently, so it is not available yet.

SC actually has reversed the Roberts decision when Roberts was on the DC Circuit Court.

SC decision does not rule to close Gitmo. It just says it is illegal to have it. [huh?]

[Pete]

If it is 5-3, with Roberts recused then this, in reality, is not really a surprise and no big deal. Of course, the MSM and the Left will put it forth as proof that Bush is out of control. Let them. When they live in their fantasy world, they lose elections.

[Trust but Verify]

I'd prefer to know a lot more about the ruling and the ramifications before coming to that conclusion.

[jwalsh07]

Predictable, Scalia already made his views clear. Sad but predictable. Congress needs to act now.

[b4its2late]

Idiots.

Guess it's time to adopt - Take no prisoners.

[Puppage]

illegal under both military justice law and the Geneva convention

The Geneva Convention does NOT apply to these terrorists!!

[Ron in Acreage]

Democrats want them to have citizenship and voting rights.

[Dog]

OK Line them up and shot the lot of them.