Kicking Ass: The Democratic Party's Blog

5-4 Decision on Habeas Rights

Posted by Michael Link on June 12, 2008 at 12:13 PM

It just broken this morning. Here's SCOTUS Blog:

In a stunning blow to the Bush Administration in its war-on-terrorism policies, the Supreme Court ruled Thursday that foreign nationals held at Guantanamo Bay have a right to pursue habeas challenges to their detention. The Court, dividing 5-4, ruled that Congress had not validly taken away habeas rights. If Congress wishes to suspend habeas, it must do so only as the Constitution allows — when the country faces rebellion or invasion.

The Court stressed that it was not ruling that the detainees are entitled to be released — that is, entitled to have writs issued to end their confinement. That issue, it said, is left to the District Court judges who will be hearing the challenges. The Court also said that “we do not address whether the President has authority to detain” individuals during the war on terrorism, and hold them at the U.S. Naval base in Cuba; that, too, it said, is to be considered first by the District judges.

The Associated Press called it the "third rebuke of the Bush administration's treatment of prisoners." And more:

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 6 years. Roughly 270 men remain at the island prison, classified as enemy combatants and held on suspicion of terrorism or links to al-Qaida and the Taliban.

The ruling could resurrect many detainee lawsuits that federal judges in Washington put on hold pending the outcome of the high court case.

Even more at the NYT.

Comments (3) «

Anyone care to guess which four Justices voted against this? That is why this election is so important. The next thirty years of juris prudence is at stake.

1
BobVADemHawk-Obama08 on June 12, 2008 at 01:12 PM

Anyone care to guess which four Justices voted against this? That is why this election is so important. The next thirty years of juris prudence is at stake.

2
BobVADemHawk-Obama08 on June 12, 2008 at 01:15 PM

Why would strict constructionist judges vote to take away habeus corpus from any individual? The Bush Crime Family has replaced civil liberties with political expediency.

Bush has so jeapordized the integrity of the Supreme Court that Bob Barr has bolted his own Party and is running as a Libertarian...and many Young Republicans and fiscal conservatives are following him.

Why is there no honor among these patriotic-speaking hypocrites? The Republicans no longer have any resect for the Bill of Rights or for those who fought so hard to bring it into law and perserve it for posterity.

It has acted as a beacon of hope for the oppressed around the world and made us their moral compass. We cannot fail now.

The Bush Crime Family cannot be allowed to stand above our Constitution. If we do not stop them this election, Bin Lauden will win by default as they trash the rest of our civil liberties.

Conservatives and liberals are united in this principle. While McCain doesn't even understand what's at stake.

No wonder Rove thinks he's the perfect candidate for the Bush Crime Family's purposes. We must attack him from both the Left and the Right.

3
SandyH on June 12, 2008 at 02:20 PM


« Hide Comments


Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment.
(sign out - change name - manage account)