Posted on 06/12/2008 7:04:11 AM PDT by DeaconBenjamin
WASHINGTON: The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that foreign terrorism suspects held at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, have rights under the U.S. Constitution to challenge their detention in civilian courts.
The justices handed the Bush administration its third setback at the high court since 2004 over its treatment of prisoners who are being held indefinitely and without charges at the U.S. naval base in Cuba. The vote was 5 to 4, with the court's liberal justices in the majority.
Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the court, said, "The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times."
It was not immediately clear whether this ruling, unlike the first two, would lead to prompt hearings for the detainees, some of whom have been held more than six years. About 270 men remain at the island prison, classified as enemy combatants and held on suspicion of terrorism or links to Al Qaeda and the Taliban.
(Excerpt) Read more at iht.com ...
My point was simply, we have John McCain because no good conservative ran this time....and he came out as the best of a sub-par group for our GOP candidate.
Thus now, we must be adults. We must recognize at this time in our nation's history we do not have the luxury of a pro-test vote. Or a non-vote because we do not fully support Mr. Mcain. Our nation at this time must pick the best immediate option of the two options we have (and that is McCain or Obama).
There is no question here who will be best on the whole for the next 4 years. That would be Mr. McCain (hopefully he picks a solid conservative VP).
bump
I hope W and Rummy have finally figured it out: shoot to kill...don’t take prisoners. Quit tying the hands of our troops in battle.
It’s amazing we’re giving Constitutional protection to people who want to wipe this country off the map. Let’s just kill ourselves now! It’ll stop the pain and suffering.
You are right. Goodbye terrorists.
Does this now apply to all POWs taken captive in future conflicts?
“My guess is that Anthony Kennedy is McCain’s kind of Justice.”
Justice Kennedy is the new Sandra Day O’Conner. Another Reagan appointee who cherishes the publicity and power that comes from being the key “swing vote.”
“The President should defy this ruling!”
There’s better reason to defy this one than other presidents have refused to enforce. Where is Andrew Jackson when you need him?? The Cherokees won their case in the supreme court against Jackson’s Indian Removal act of 1830 and the State of Georgia. The court ruled that the neither government (state of Georgia or Feds) had the right to remove them from their homeland. In fact, the court ruled the Cherokee nation there had the same rights as any sovereign state of the union. Jackson stated if the SCJustice wanted his ruling enforced, he wasn’t going to do it. We all know how that turned out.
But THESE people are ENEMY FOREIGN combatants, and they’ll have their day in our courts. Terrible decision.
“It should not apply to non citizen terrorists. If you are not part of a regular army or militia and caught trying to kill US soldiers or citizens, you should have no rights whatsoever.”
Agreed, but first, lets establish that they are in fact terrorists.
I prefer to leave that decision to the military, where it belongs. We cannot try each detainee as if they were common criminals. Protections afforded criminals are impossible to apply to unlawful combatants simply because of the circumstances of their arrests. Not to mention they don't qualify for those protections anyway.
This will go down as one of the worst rulings by a Supreme Court EVER.
hmm... I just had a chance to read Chief Justice Roberts’ dissent:
” So who has won? Not the detainees. The Court’s analysis leaves them with only the prospect of further litigation to determine the content of their new habeas right, followed by further litigation to resolve their particular cases,followed by further litigation before the D. C. Circuit— where they could have started had they invoked the DTA
procedure. Not Congress, whose attempt to “determine— through democratic means—how best” to balance the security of the American people with the detainees’ liberty
interests, see Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U. S. 557, 636 (2006) (BREYER, J., concurring), has been unceremoniously brushed aside. Not the Great Writ, whose majesty is
hardly enhanced by its extension to a jurisdictionally quirky outpost, with no tangible benefit to anyone. Not the rule of law, unless by that is meant the rule of lawyers,
who will now arguably have a greater role than military and intelligence officials in shaping policy for alien enemy combatants. And certainly not the American people, who today lose a bit more control over the conduct of this Nation’s foreign policy to unelected, politically unaccountable judges.
I respectfully dissent.”
I hadn’t really thought of it in those terms. Perhaps my initial comment was a bit premature and misplaced.
Like Andrew Jackson.
Not the detainees. The Court’s analysis leaves them with only the prospect of further litigation to determine the content of their new habeas right, followed by further litigation to resolve their particular cases,followed by further litigation before the D. C. Circuit— where they could have started had they invoked the DTA procedure.
Not Congress, whose attempt to “determine— through democratic means—how best” to balance the security of the American people with the detainees’ liberty interests, see Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U. S. 557, 636 (2006) (BREYER, J., concurring), has been unceremoniously brushed aside.
Not the Great Writ, whose majesty is hardly enhanced by its extension to a jurisdictionally quirky outpost, with no tangible benefit to anyone.
Not the rule of law, unless by that is meant the rule of lawyers, who will now arguably have a greater role than military and intelligence officials in shaping policy for alien enemy combatants.
And certainly not the American people, who today lose a bit more control over the conduct of this Nation’s foreign policy to unelected, politically unaccountable judges.
I respectfully dissent.”
Justice Roberts is a brilliant man.
Zackly, or take prisoners and hand them over to our Middle East allies for "safe" keeping.
Bkmark for later. Thanks.
....” So who has won? Not the detainees.
The Court’s analysis leaves them with only the prospect of further litigation to determine the content of their new habeas right, followed by further litigation to resolve their particular cases,followed by further litigation before the D. C. Circuit— where they could have started had they invoked the DTA procedure.
Not Congress, whose attempt to “determine— through democratic means—how best” to balance the security of the American people with the detainees’ liberty interests, see Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U. S. 557, 636 (2006) (BREYER, J., concurring), has been unceremoniously brushed aside. Not the Great Writ, whose majesty is hardly enhanced by its extension to a jurisdictionally quirky outpost, with no tangible benefit to anyone.
Not the rule of law, unless by that is meant the rule of lawyers, who will now arguably have a greater role than military and intelligence officials in shaping policy for alien enemy combatants.
And certainly not the American people, who today lose a bit more control over the conduct of this Nation’s foreign policy to unelected, politically unaccountable judges.
I respectfully dissent.”
Should be required reading for everyone!
Exactly what I said to Mr. Dittter when we heard this on the news this morning.
And we appointed 7 of 9 of these assholes. That’s just part of the reason why I’m not playing along to get along any longer.
Provide a Conservative candidate and I’ll vote for him/her. Provide another RINO, and foget aboud it.
We don’t do ourselves any favors when we vote in leftists. They make our goals impossible to realize. They make the realization of the left’s goals possible.
Our team voted to affirm every one of these justices. It’s time to clean house.
I’d rather have a Conservative 41 seat minority in the Senate than 90 seats filled by RINOs.
Pretty much.
And I disrespectfully dissent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.