[Parmenio]

Great news! These rulings came just this morning. The wheels of justice may grind slowly, but they grind inexorably. It also sounds to this layman's ears that there is little basis for appeals to SCOTUS.

[3AngelaD]

Would someone please post Nelson saying “Ha, ha”? It gets me these pieces of crap are identified as “four Britons,” as if they were four Anglo-Saxon, Anglican communicants from London, Leeds, Manchester and Blandings Parva. These are West-hating Islamic terrorists who happen to live in the U.K.

[river rat]

Now I understand CLEARLY why our Gunny advised us he wasn’t interested in prisoners — unless he described EXACTLY what kind of prisoner he wanted with great specificity....

Otherwise - he said WE would be responsible for the security, care and feeding of ANY unsolicited prisoners brought back to HIS perimeter....

Clearly — that Gunny in the 60’s had a sharply focused vision of what was to come....

I sure hope we “extracted” enough meaningful and actionable intelligence from all those Islamist %$^%$%^^%$ we allowed to achieve “prisoner status” to make all this grief of their and the leftist’s bitching, crying and court tests..

[Right Cal Gal]

Probably not, but you just KNOW the Ninth Circus will find a way to take appeals - I’m starting to think they LIKE being b***hslapped by SCOTUS in 98 out of 100 certs.

[CRBDeuce]

With Italy and Spain joining France in deporting terrorists, soon perhaps the Brits will send out their garbage as well!

[keepitreal]

Judge Henderson wrote that the Act was to be interpreted by analyzing the constitutional meaning of its language, because it was designed to restore constitutional rights to the free exercise of religion. Since it had ruled last year, in other detainee cases, that those at Guantanamo have no constitutional rights, they are not covered by RFRA because they are not “persons” in the constitutional sense, she wrote. (The ruling that the detainees have no constitutional rights is now under review by the Supreme Court in two pending cases on detainees’ legal rights, Boumediene v. Bush, 06-1195, and Al Odah v. U.S., 06-1196).

No Constitutional rights, not on US soil. This would probably change in a Huckabee administration. Terrorist lawsuits brought by legal aid (government funded) lawyers.