All opinions posted. None too pathetic or contrived. Everyone gets their say.

"...even the wicked get worse than they deserve." - Willa Cather, One of Ours

Monday, June 28, 2004

Terror Detainees Win Right to U.S. Courts

Associated Press
The Supreme Court delivered a mixed verdict Monday on the Bush administration's anti-terrorism policies, ruling that the U.S. government has the power to hold American citizens and foreign nationals without charges or trial, but that detainees can challenge their treatment in U.S. courts.

[...]

Ruling in the case of American-born detainee Yaser Esam Hamdi, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said the court has "made clear that a state of war is not a blank check for the president when it comes to the rights of the nation's citizens."

Congress did give the president authority to hold Hamdi, a four-justice plurality of the court said, but that does not cancel out the basic right to a day in court.

The court ruled similarly in the case of about 600 foreign-born men held indefinitely at a U.S. Navy prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The men [held at Gitmo] can use American courts to contest their captivity and treatment, the high court said.

The Supreme Court sidestepped a third major terrorism case, ruling that a lawsuit filed on behalf of detainee Jose Padilla improperly named Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld instead of the much lower-level military officer in charge of the Navy brig in South Carolina where Padilla has been held for more than two years.

Padilla must refile a lawsuit challenging his detention in a lower court.
These were 6-3 decisions, and I am surprised that they were even that close. If the court had rule that it had no authority to oversee this process it would significantly undermine its own authority under the constitution and would have fundamentally changed the balance of power between the three branches of government. The court was never very likely to put forward a decision that would weaken itself.
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home