Supreme Court opens up Gitmo lawsuit floodgates; Scalia: “The Nation will live to regret what the Court has done today. I dissent.”
What’s that sound? The thunder of left-wing lawyers and Gitmo detainees jumping up and down for joy at the Supreme Court’s ruling this morning. Brace yourselves. Dissenting Justice Antonin Scalia warns that the ruling “will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed” and concludes “The Nation will live to regret what the Court has done today. I dissent.”
Chief Justice John Roberts says the rule of law and the American people have lost out–and with this ruling, we “lose a bit more control over the conduct of this Nation’s foreign policy to unelected, politically unaccountable judges.”
The bottom line via 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 Court also declared that detainees do not have to go through the special civilian court review process that Congress created in 2005, since that is not an adequate substitute for habeas rights. The Court refused to interpret the Detainee Treatment Act — as the Bush Administration had suggested — to include enough legal protection to make it an adequate replacement for habeas. Congress, it concluded, unconstitutionally suspended the writ in enacting that Act.
I’m reminded of what one DHS source pointed out to me when the high court ruled in favor of habeas corpus rights four years ago: “Hmm, now that the Gitmo detainees are entitled to habeas challenges and hearings by American courts and American judges, I wonder how long before they and their lawyers claim that they are entitled to asylum hearings as well?”
Won’t be long now!
Howard Bashman has links to the ruling and oral argument transcript. Justice Scalia’s dissent says it all:
Both the Chief Justice and Justice Antonin Scalia issued dissenting opinions, and all four dissenters joined in both dissents. In his dissent, Justice Scalia writes, “The game of bait-and-switch that today’s opinion plays upon the Nation’s Commander in Chief will make the war harder on us. It will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed.” Justice Scalia’s 25-page dissenting opinion concludes, “The Nation will live to regret what the Court has done today. I dissent.”
Jonathan Adler: “As I (super-quickly) skim Justice Kennedy’s opinion for the Court, it appears to hold that Guantanamo detainees have habeas rights, that these rights can only be denied through a valid suspension of habeas rights (under the Suspension Clause of the Constitution), that the procedures created by the Detainee Treatment Act were not an adequate substitute for habeas, and therefore Section 7 of the Military Commission Act is an unconstitutional suspension of the detainees’ habeas rights. I’m sure I (and others) will have more to say about this case in subsequent posts.”
While I am still reviewing the 5-4 decision written by Anthony Kennedy, apparently giving GITMO detainees access to our civilian courts, at the outset I am left to wonder whether all POWs will now have access to our civilian courts? After all, you would think lawful enemy combatants have a better claim in this regard than unlawful enemy combatants. And if POWs have access to our civilian courts, how do our courts plan to handle the thousands, if not tens of thousands of cases, that will be brought to them in future conflicts?
It has been the objective of the left-wing bar to fight aspects of this war in our courtrooms, where it knew it would have a decent chance at victory. So complete is the Court’s disregard for the Constitution and even its own precedent now that anything is possible. And what was once considered inconceivable is now compelled by the Constitution, or so five justices have ruled. I fear for my country. I really do. And AP, among others, reports this story as a defeat for “the Bush administration.” Really? I see it as a defeat for the nation.
UPDATE: The 5-4 GITMO decision brings to the front, yet again, John McCain’s position on judges versus his own policies. McCain undoubtedly supports the 5-4 decision, yet the justices who voted against it, and argued strenuously against it, are of the kind McCain claims to want on the bench. We have seen the same issue arise respecting campaign finance. This is not to say that McCain won’t nominate originalists to the bench. But if he does, he will be nominating to the Court individuals who are better adherents to the Constitution than he is.
I’m skimming through the ruling, too. Here’s the key passage of the majority’s ruling, pp. 41-42:
We hold that Art. I, §9, cl. 2, of the Constitution has full effect at Guantanamo Bay. If the privilege of habeas corpus is to be denied to the detainees now before us,
Congress must act in accordance with the requirements of the Suspension Clause. Cf. Hamdi, 542 U. S., at 564 (SCALIA, J., dissenting) (“[I]ndefinite imprisonment on reasonable suspicion is not an available option of treatment for those accused of aiding the enemy, absent a suspension of the writ”). This Court may not impose a de facto suspension by abstaining from these controversies.See Hamdan, 548 U. S., at 585, n. 16 (“[A]bstention is not appropriate in cases . . . in which the legal challenge ‘turn[s] on the status of the persons as to whom the military
asserted its power’ ” (quoting Schlesinger v. Councilman, 420 U. S. 738, 759 (1975))). The MCA does not purport to be a formal suspension of the writ; and the Government, in its submissions to us, has not argued that it is. Petitioners, therefore, are entitled to the privilege of habeas corpus to challenge the legality of their detention.
Here’s the conclusion of Chief Justice John Robert’s dissent, pp. 27-28.
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.
***
Related: Who’s funding the Gitmo lawyers?
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- JammieWearingFool
- SCOTUS sides with Gitmo Detainees « Azman Family Politics
- SCOTUS: Foreign Unlawful Combatant Terrorists Protected by US Constitution | PAWaterCooler.com
- Flopping Aces » Blog Archive » “The Nation Will Live To Regret What The Court Has Done Today.”
- The Dan Lee Report » Blog Archive » Supreme Court Rules For Terrorists in one of the Darkest moments in U.S. History
- A brief note on the Supreme Court habeas corpus cases [Karl]
- Rhymes With Right
- The Thomas Chronicles » Supreme Court Rules on Gitmo
- Outside The Beltway | OTB
- SCOTUS Says that You and the Islamists are All the Same to the Constitution | The Sundries Shack
- baldilocks
- Top U.S. court says terrorism detainees have rights * | Jack’s Newswatch
- Supreme Court Creates Killing : Stop The ACLU
- The USSC has lost it’s collective mind | BitsBlog
- Supreme Court Issues Gitmo Ruling Favorable to Lawsuits | OpenMarket.org
- Supreme Court Issues Gitmo Ruling Favorable to Lawsuits | OpenMarket.org
- SCOTUS: You’d better go ahead and kill them, then. » Pursuing Holiness
- The Radio Patriot
- Gitmo Detainees Get Their Day in Court « Axis of Right
- Media Mythbusters Blog » Blog Archive » Media Bias Roundup - 06/12/08
- Democrat=Socialist
- The other side of the Supreme Court ruling « ReasonableCitizen
- Six Meat Buffet » Boon for Humvee Chasers
- Supreme Court Ruling on Illegal Enemy Combatants; US Will Live (or Die) to Regret « God Drinks Beer
- Blame Congress, Not The Judges « Tai-Chi Policy
- The Patriot Room
- June, 2008 Archive « Right Minded Online
- Guantnamo Detainee New Al Qaedas Chief - Page 2 - YardLimits.com
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Ally McBeal approach, Gitmo
Power Line
» More From the East Anglia Archives
Pundit & Pundette
» Various and sundryStop The ACLU
» Obama To Hold Another Prime Timer To Explain Our Afghanistan Strategy To Islamic ExtremistsAmSpecBlog
» Lieberman Says He's "Stubborn" on Gov't PlanTigerHawk
» Negative equity
I meant to hit Preview, not Submit….
CALIFORNIA…
$20 billion shortfall in a welfare state… and they are thinking of acting like conservatives.
Reflexive-liberal college graduates start making real money and get to keep more of it becuase of conservative (i.e LOW) tax policy. If Messiahobama gets elected, let’s the Bish tax cuts expire, and then jacks up tax rates even more, suddenly they end up with a 20% pay-cut. See if they still vote Dumocrat.
It’s easy to want the government to give people more money when it comes out of someone else’s pocket.
I’m with you here too, Terrig. OMG the freaking idiocy on display from lgm and Rusty just make me see red sometimes. My husband was upset as well. As the decision filters down throughout the military, there will be more murmurings of discontent. It took my husband, on videconference link, to process all this.
I guess it’s back to Trolls Anonymous for you and I, Terrig. I’ve probably already broken my umpteenth step today violating my cardinal rule of speaking with rubes like Rusty and Lgm.
I hope all is well with your husband, Terrig as well as yourself. It’s never easy to take care of children when your husband is overseas. Am experiencing it right now and it’s just me. I’ll keep you and your husband in my thoughts and prayers.
Terrig:
My bad… meant to say, first paragraph:
It took my husband, on videoconference link, a full minute to process all this.
Preview button is our friend. Preview button is our friend.
Hi Emjem,
When my husband called he asked if he understood the ruling correctly. I told him he did and he said that’s all they were talking about. He saw Menchaca and Tucker and he said somethings that would get me banned regarding the idiot Supremes.
You know I can’t sleep tonight and I know it’s this stupid ruling and the stupid trolls. So, I’ve been occupying myself with watching old 80’s videos (mostly Journey) on You Tube. Isn’t that pathetic?
I tried the “troll diet” but sometimes I’m off the wagon. Their stupidity never ceases to amaze me. Rusty and LGM are really out of the real world althought they believe themselves to be the smartest people in the room.
Thank you for your kind thoughts and prayers. I know your husband is overseas as well. I will keep you both in my prayers too.
I’m actually going to the Army Ball this weekend with my ex-father in law who is a retired Col in the Army. My ex has been good about coming up and doing work on the house and cutting the grass here. They’re good people and they always take good care of me still. All in all their son’s a good guy, just couldn’t adjust to “married life”. He tried three more times after me but I lasted the longest at 18 months.
My husband is glad they’re in the area in McLean and that Ted helps out too. I’m actually lucky this deployment, I had no one out in HI to help me out with the kids and handy man jobs.
Have a great evening and hope you’re doing well other than missing your husband and I hope he’s home soon.
lgm and Rusty don’t appreciate the sacrifices made which allows them to spew their drivel.
I’d defend their right to spew drivel, but I know that they want to censor my free speech.
lgm and Rusty just remember if this country ever goes socialist, they’ll come for you next, because you are both the wrong kind of socialist/marxist.
I have had a Browning 9mm Hi-power for almost 40 years and love it. Large capacity clip and not much kick. My wife shoots it also. Remington 870 12 guage Pump Wingmaster for the shotgun. Been around long time… tried and true. Russian SKS and AK-47 knockoff semi-autos are nice if you just want to sling lead for protection. Ammo is cheap.
For those few who think that the poor detainees at Gitmo are just being held unfairly and did no wrong, I sugest you take a look at this CNN story (hardly a right wing media site).
And that is just some of the story.
I think some of the justices must have smoked too much medicinal weed before they came up with this moronic decision.
The “despotic branch” Thomas Jefferson warned us about strikes again.
Fine. Then let’s shoot them on the spot. For the ones we have, put them all on a plane and start to fly across the Atlantic, mysteriously a problem will occur causing said aircraft to explode, to give the terrorist scumbag a taste of hell. Also, the 5 justices who supported this should be arrested and charged with treason.
If I wasn’t so afraid of what would happen , I’d be more than happy to watch lgm and the
liberalsmarxists that “run the country” do it for a year, but I don’t live in Venezuela.From a Constitutional perspective (rather than a public policy one), this was a tough case. However, IMHO, I’m not sure it will end up being a particularly meaningful decision. Bush handled this whole thing very poorly from a process point of view, as was the case with most of the planning and execution with respect to the war in Iraq. The next administration will hopefully adjust and the ongoing fight against terrorism won’t be adversely impacted. Many of you are overreacting I think. No big surprise on that count I guess.
We finally made it. Somebody finally found a way to blame it all on Bush. Congratulations, you idiot.
america – love it, or…………. vote Dem.
Maybe I’m not too smart, but my God, if these dirtbags weren’t arrested on US soil, how can anyone say they are subject to the same rights under the US constitution? Their slimey lawyers will have this in court for the next twenty years. All I can hope is that they’ll be detained in one of our prisons where even the prisoners have more of an ethic code than those nitwit judges.
Ruth, David, Tony, de Geezer, who’s the fifth (answer Lil Stevie Breyer)? Expect the US to crumble before the Hague within 10 years, be strapped to Gobal Warming Science, to cave to the UN on everything, to lose individual gun rights, and to have Canadian/English/EU free speech rights.
Plus the death penalty will be made unconstitutional.
Robert Heinlein wrote once that US and Russia would cross paths — Russia to become more free and capitalist, US to become more socialist and unfree. He was right.
Sometimes I think all of this divisiveness, bickering, and headbutting is just part of a big game, kind of like a debate team. You choose a side or assigned a side and that’s the attitude you go through life with. If we all woke up tomorrow and our political persuasions were switched our attitudes would change too. The only problem is this game is being played with real lives and in some cases life and death situations. We need to get back to the value of doing what’s right not what’s expedient for “ME”.
My first thought, with the SCOTUS decision, was that our soldiers are the people who will pay for their decision (as well as the American people who they swear to protect).
Debra Burlingham said it best:
It’s idiotic thinking like this that’s dangerous to the country. Go tell Justice Roberts he’s overreacting; lol.
The decision will lead to far less intelligence being gathered. Commanders will see little use in risking lives capturing al Qaeda; the ghouls would just be lawyered up from moment one. What comes out Justice Kennedy (and the other clueless four’s) revolving door of justice will bee-line it back to the jihad to kill our troops or more here.
BTW, forward deployed Military Police on the battlefield are very limited in their ability in their law enforcement role (they are primarily a force protection asset). What are our frontline troops in the close fight to do if they catch Jonnie al-Jihadi, call 9-1-1? It ain’t going to happen.
So, to protect Jonnie al-Juhadi, the U.S. District Courts crafting the solutions that gutless Justice Kennedy et al did not, defense counsel lawyer should be assign to every infantry squad, tank section, Stryker platoon, intelligence exploitation team, and Special Ops A-team (and Navy SEAL Team), etc (all small elements in the battle box. They should be dragged (screaming and kicking, if necessary) out onto the battlefield to observe for things they can use in the “detainee’s” defense.
Hey, ambulance chasers: any of you have the testicular fortitude to volunteer?
You know what’s really scary? The SCOTUS is chock full of judges who don’t have a clue as to why we have those terrorists at GITMO in the first place. Or the fact that nowhere in the Constitution of the United States does it mention enemy combatants or foreign citizens. If there’s been some kind of an amendment that we’re not aware of, let us know.
Those slugs were captured after firefights, caught planting IED’s, and arrested as part of sweeps for terrorist cells. I won’t lose one minute’s sleep over it, either. Maybe you could pay a visit to GITMO and tell the Soldiers whose job it is to guard them, all about your angst and frustration over the “sheer inhumanity of holding human beings indefinitely without charge”.
You should divest yourself of the notion that we’re fighting people who play by the Marquis of Queensberry Rules or know where Geneva is on a map. The Islamofascists don’t give one hair on a liberal’s ass about the “right to challenge your detention” .
I didn’t know that the SCOTUS had that ability either.
Guess what, sweetpea, a lot of the ones released from GITMO pick up where they left off:
Link: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,354209,00.html
Really? I don’t recall the Pentagon saying anything of the sort. Aside from that, who gives a crap about a Koran being flushed when Islamic jihadists are beheading, blowing people to bits, and committing all kinds of atrocities in the name of what is written in that 7th Century screed. Would you care if it involved a Bible or Torah?
I thought our side of the coin involved fighting terrorists, not abetting them.
I was in Iraq twice, so I’m more than qualified to speak on the subject of counter-terrorism.
Stuck on stupid. Imagine that.
So 3000 in one fell swoop is peanuts? GFY.
It would behoove you to remember that the Islamic war against the West and freedom was declared decades ago, but no one paid attention. They want to kill us and if you’re not fully prepared to do what is necessary in the battle for civilization, it will be lost. Victory is not attained through idiotic opinion polls, fatuous politically correct debate over Rules of Engagement or treatment of terrorist cut throats held at GITMO. It’s won by annihilating the enemy. They attack us, we destroy them. Simple. It takes a leader with the intestinal fortitude to do what’s best for the country in spite of itself and its detractors. (Hint: It ain’t a liberal)
Mistressjustice was unavailable for comment.
What is the proper way to handle non uniformed combatants?
I’m sure that 100 other people have said this comment, but…
According to five rogue justices, we can hold people without habeas corpus only in the events of rebellion or invasion. If 9/11 wasn’t an invasion, what the (blank bleep blip blippity bleep blank) is?
#322:
How do the police or any other government agency with police power have the right to arrest or detain an American citizen on property that they don’t own? How can Congress or the SC pass and uphold laws that force private business to install handicap ramps or parking spaces when they don’t own it? In other words, ownership is irrelevant; it is action by government that is the issue.
Screw it, if in doubt kill them.
Hubby says, “That’s why you don’t take prisoners.”
9/11 was just religious expression that got a little out of hand, no real problem here. We should all be tolerant of those who want to express their religion; you know what I mean brother?
The USSC decision is also horribly damaging to our ability to gather intelligence. I am a former Army officer, and I can say with certainty that soldiers – infinitely better educated and more savvy now than in any time prior – know the effect of this awful ruling. When the soldiers know that, upon capture, an enemy combatant will enjoy all of the constitutional protections afforded U.S. citizens, then soldiers might just decide that capture is not in the best interests of the mission and eliminate the enemy combatant instead, along with the intelligence that might have been gleaned.
Wait – maybe just killing these animals isn’t such a bad thing …
You hit the nail on the head. I have heard the following form some of the troops over here in Iraq (Yep that is where I am posting from):
To read more on this you can go to my blog and check it out (shameless plug).
seige, stick to your poorly designed and defective bridges and leave the big boy thinking to me.
After reading the posts and catching up, I’ve been forced to conclude that lgm is, in fact, the most ignorant. educator. ever. in. the. history. of. bad. educators.
I’m going to have to be less than kind, lgm. I don’t like having to rant, but…you’ve left me with little else as far as a response is concerned.
lgm, if you are so elite, and call your mentally deficient friends elite…why do you cry so much when people make calls of elitism? Wouldnt that validate your own statements here?
Or does this make you a whiner, a liar, and rather hypocritical?
You’re the most ignorant, most obtuse member of acadamia i’ve ever come across. I’ve never met a person who proclaims to be a professor/educator that couldnt actually have an intellectual honest discussion about anything at all.
Anytime you’re challenged here, you run from the facts. You produce facts that either don’t matter, don’t prove your point, or you try and change the subject to “well, bush lied, people died” mantra that gets rather redundant and that 5 year olds can be taught to say. And like a 5 year old, you simply parrot democratic talking points, with little to no understanding of how things work in the real world. You turn a blind eye to facts to suit your own world view, and then come across as condescending as if you’re some enlightening guru coming to teach the unwashed masses. You are willfully (and woefully, for those wanting to correct) ignorant of the extent of topics here. Your lack of ability to see things that are wrong, and SAY that something is wrong, lays to rest claims of moral relavance and shows a lack of any discernable character. It shows a lack of spine. You don’t have the will to do what it takes to defend our country or our freedoms. You are a coward. You are an intellectual coward and a fraud. You rest comfortable under the protections of liberty, and besmirch everything that people who have come before you provide. The fact any of us have the right to speak our minds is a freedom granted through sacrifice and blood. And while windowlickers like you spew your hate, your incorrect facts and your liberal ideology, you’re free to do so…but people like myself, who HAVE experienced what it is to personally sacrifice and serve, as well as all who have, have to sit and watch as second rate morons tear our country apart in principle and deed…it makes me sick.
You, sir, are weak in mind AND spirit. And it shows everytime you hit the “Submit” button.
I wouldn’t let a second rate hack like you run a dog obedience school. You’ve shown you have neither the mentality, the ability, or the fortitude to do anything but be a whining, spineless, knuckledragging bafoon.
You and your “elite” view sickens me. And just for the record…You really have NO idea to whom you speak on these boards. You have no idea of the education level of those who post here on these boards. Do you know where I went to college? What level of education I have? Do you know what most of the people here do for a living, or what their experiences are in total? I doubt it. There are many here that display class and intelligence, both liberal and conservative. There are those here who actually attempt to back up their statement with facts. You are not one of them.
You, sir, are a disgrace to your profession (if you are in fact an “educator”), a disgrace to intellectuals everywhere, and are a brown stain on the matress of humanity.
I’m done on this thread. It’s not worth much more to post on this.
Sorry folks. Just couldnt keep silent on that.
I agree with Roberts…
and Scalia…
Does Rosetta Stone offer instant immersion in the more popular languages from the Middle East soon to be required here?
dakine said:
Yawn. Didn’t know useless pigs could think. Dakine please don’t pretend you’re somebody, you’re terribly transparent.
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
For those liberals out there who need a refresher course, above I quote the 1st Amendment to the Constitution. We may petition.
With apologies to the authors of the Kelo petition that I have freely plagiarized (that is a word you liberals should know something about) but adapted, may I suggest the following as a start.
…
To: U. S. Congress
PETITION FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES
We the People of the United States, do hereby demand that our duly elected representatives in both houses of Congress, initiate impeachment proceedings against the following Supreme Court Justices:
John Paul Stevens
Anthony M. Kennedy
David H. Souter
Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Stephen G. Breyer
We, the undersigned, consider the Supreme Court ruling in Boumediene et al. v. Bush, 06-1195, rendered June 12, 2008, not only unacceptable, but to be in criminal violation of the Justice’s oaths to uphold, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
Be advised that We the People regard elected officials to be our public servants. Failure to take action against the Justices specified shall be considered support for the decision rendered in the aforementioned case, and will result in our resolve to ensure your defeat in the next election.
Being from myriad political and ideological spectra, we are united in our belief that foreign nationals or enemy combatants held at Guantanamo Bay DO NOT have a right to pursue habeas challenges to their detention.
Sincerely,
The Undersigned
Who can appropriately embellish and who will start the website petition? I don’t have the means.
abstractmind said:
Abstract great post but you have to realize lgm, dakine, mistressj and others cling to liberalism because they could get nowhere without it. These people need liberalism because they’re runts in the game of life. Where would these people be without their affirmative action and hatred for America. People like dakine and lgm would be locked up if habeas corpus were suspended and possibly executed and that’s really not a threat, it’s a cold truth of reality.
You cannot give new rights to non-citizens with out taking away rights from citizens. The court diminished all of us. We now have less of a right to our own lives and safety. I think these people are so out of touch that they will still think they are superior and made the right decision even after the terrorist, whom they wish to protect blow up the Supreme Court Building. Which I think might be the terrorists way of showing thanks for all the help. They have just given terrorist an unlimited bank account that they can draw upon to attack the peace and freedoms of every one in the world….Lawyers, who wish to aid terror are going to make out big. And We the People are going to pay.
Of course this is no surprise to anybody that understands liberal politics and the Supreme Court. For anybody thinking of sitting out the election because John McFraud is a RINO; just remember this Court Decision, and understand that the ONLY reason to vote for McCain is his 1-2 appointments to the Supreme Court.
But anyway, sure is a good day to be an enemy combatant!!! Thanks Supreme Court for making it easier for our enemies to kill our soldiers!!! What a Country…
With a Demonrat Congress, impeachment of the SCOTUS justices who voted rights to captured battlefield terrorists that uniformed enemy combatants who followed the rules of war were never given is a non-starter.
The Kucinich Bush impeachment articles have a better chance.
I agree with you, and that is why I’m voting.
But
1) McCain couldn’t get a constitutionalist confirmed in what is almost certainly going to be a Democrat Senate
2) McCain, based on his less than stellar record on constitutional issues, like McCain-Feingold, wouldn’t appoint Scalias and Roberts even if he could.
Look for more O’Connor and Kennedy type picks. Note that Kennedy voted the wrong way in this case. But a McCain pick will vote the right way a little over half the time, a Obama pick would always vote the wrong way, and while McCain might not even get a pick, the elderly uber-libs, like the Marxist ACLU hag Ginsberg, who can’t stay awake anymore during oral arguments, will probably step down to let President Obama pick a younger communist to continue her legacy for another 40 years.
Ed, unfortunately your comment is true.
But We the People’s voice will be heard somehow. The “Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less” program has reached the 500,000 mark I believe.
We need to start somewhere.
I recall, based on the opinion of Mark Levin, who I believe extrapolated McCain’s waterboarding hysteria, that McCain supported this decision, a bunch of people were citing this case as a reason they’d never vote for McCain.
Link
I know the Moby will accuse me of being a ‘McCain cheerleader’. Again, not much to recommend voting for him, except his opponent is a radical friend of terrorists.
On June 13th, 2008 at 9:51 am, Jimmie said:
Agreed! The intrinsic value of any object is its uniqueness and exclusivity, be it a precious gem or an exotic auto. The US Constitution is no exception.
The SCOTUS has greatly devalued OUR constitutional rights by bestowing them upon non-citizen terrorists – people who want to harm us – in an effort to promote their warped interpretation of what the Constitution should be, not what is, and a leftist political agenda.
How can the government possibly ask its soldiers and citizens to fight wars and make sacrifices in protecting those freedoms and rights guaranteed by the Constitution and Bill of Rights when the SCOTUS hands them out freely to the nation’s enemies?
It’s perfectly fine to extend the ideals contained in our Constitution to other nations as a model upon which to base their own, like we are doing in Iraq, but it is wrong to bestow – without the consent of the people – the rights and privileges of an American citizen to people whose one goal in life is to destroy us.
The Constitution – our Constitution – is uniquely American and exclusively ours; what the SCOTUS did was wrong…shamefully wrong.
Not to mention McCain helped ensure that nominees would not get confirmed with his whole gang of 14 stunt.
McCain is on record (for what that is worth) as saying he would appoint Scalia type Judges; having said that I would hope, as you said, that any appointment by him would be better than the marxists that Obama would appoint if he gets the chance. Any apptment by Obama would make Ruth BaderGinsberg look like Bill Buckley.
Oh, you mean Cindy Sheehan, Code Pink, Congress and those other productive members of our society?
I know what lgm means now. Lobotomized girly man.
“Useless pig”? Wow, good one seige. Based on your last fully unhinged post, I’m guessing you’d be quite comfortable being a citizen of any number of totalitarian states around the globe. seige, the US is better than everybody else. Our form of government has its faults and often times our leaders fall short, but we do it better than it’s ever been done in the history of the planet. Unfortunately, the way we do it is extremely difficult and often times crazily inefficient. Price we pay for being the best and doing it the right way. Unlike you, I prefer not to live in a country where folks are locked up and/or executed for holding a contrary opinion. China, Iran, N. Korea…you may want to check these places out. They might be more to your liking.
No need to apologize, the truth hurts for people like lgm.
He is an empty hack, without his liberal talking points and lies and false teaching he is nothing. Without evil people like him to stand up against there would be nothing to contrast good people against. He is the type of viper like the Pharisees of old that have always existed through time and each and every time in the history of mankind better men than him stepped up to stomp the viper into the ground to put an end to their venomous rantings.
On June 12th, 2008 at 9:20 pm, lgm said:
LGM, the line between racist-bigotry and class-warfare is a fine one – I believe you just crossed over it into Bob “Sheets” Byrd land with this one.
You do realize that it is this sort of rationalization that allows for slavery, racism, bigotry and homophobia? That it is this “I’m better than you/your achievement is a reflection of my superiority” type of thinking that allows for institutional racism, concentration camps, religious persecution, misogyny and every other form of intolerance. For the sake of your students I hope you do.
You really should get together with Sen. Byrd – you two have a lot in common.
dakine said:
Dakine read what I wrote, don’t get all touchy feely on me. I said specifically if habeas corpus were suspended, i.e., during time of invasion, liberals, who normally have an anti American outlook, would be jailed and possibly executed; in order to preserve the Union. It’s a cold fact. Liberalism would not be tolerated period.
If you can’t take it don’t dish it out.
They have given a right that enemy combatants in unfiform, whose governments were generally following the rules of war, were never granted.
Break the rules of war by disguising oneself as a civilian and mingle among them, and get extra rights as a bonus prize?
Sick.
But Kennedy’s buddies on the DC cocktail party circuit are proud of him.
seige, the substance of your posts is uninformed and factually incorrect, but I don’t have the time or inclination to walk you through the issue. BTW, I can in fact “take it”…I was simply expressing disappointment at your lack of originality with respect to that biting ad hominem. Your ad hominem attacks are about all that you do well around here, so the “useless pig” thing caught me off guard.
Jefferson recognized this over 200 years ago, and this ruling demonstrates the danger we as a nation face with this renegade branch.
How to remedy? Term limits? Reviews subject to disrobing? Apparently only Congress, by a 2/3 vote, can rid us of a Judge, but what are the odds of getting that kind of vote?
dakine said:
No, you simply don’t know the issue. What is this empty headed garbage? I simply attack because you’re a nut. Prove to me you and your liberal ilk wouldn’t be rounded up. You think the Code Pink morons wouldn’t be put into camps if habeas corpus were suspended? Give me a break go back to the ice cream stand kid.
#430
The framers didn’t see the rise of communism, bent on destroying the US from within.
The mission of the ACLU, founded by communists, was to use the Constitution as a weapon to destroy the US. They have already placed at least one member on the Supreme Court.
The communists have had effective control of the Democrat Party since 1972, with a last effort by the DLC to stop the slide in the 1990s ending in failure, which produced a non-communist President, but one who wasn’t ideological in any particular way, more interested in the perqs of power, and whose wife had Marxist leanings, who was happy to continue sending Marxists to the court.
Despite infiltration of academia and many forms of popular entertainment, as well as most of the press, the communists still can’t win consistent electoral victories. So they run candidates who pretend to be moderates, like they did in 2006, or they use courts to impose laws the people would never choose for themselves.
Any chance to the current procedure to remove out of control SCOTUS justices would be more difficult than impeachment, meaning a constitutional amendment.
The only thing to do is keep the White House out of the hands of the communists, and hope Republican presidents don’t pick too many Souter type closet cases.
Goldwater Knight
To disagree a bit, if habeas corpus were suspended under a conservative administration, only obvious enemies to public peace and order would risk arrest.
Now, if habeas corpus was suspended under the Democrats, any criticism of the regime would be grounds for arrest and detention without trial for the duration.
In time of war, the laws are silent. (Ainter arma silent leges)
Ed Mahmoud abu al-Kahoul said:
I agree I realize I’m ingnoring the peripheral. My whole thrust is when the Union is at near collapse from enemy invasion, any civilian dissent would be met with most harshly. It’s only common sense.
Everyone who gets his day in federal court will have to be deported after his case. One of the questions is, do you believe you will face persecution or harm if you are returned to your home country? This question is taken very seriously. Who among these people are going to say no?
Legal documents to reside in the United States….$5,000.00 paid for by the taxpayers.
Access to delicious social programs….$25,000.00 paid for by the taxpayers.
Lawsuits to sue for wrongful imprisonment after you were released because of a technicality, even though you were guilty of fighting on the battlefield?….$50,000.00 paid for by the taxpayers.
Getting over on your enemies before you cut their heads off?….priceless.
cjinva – I’ve copied the content and will attempt to get a petition going within the day.
I wish there was a stronger threat than just trying to vote them out of office. They get that threat all the time…
The link for the Petition
Sign away and send to everyone you know.
I’d be more supportive of denouncing this decision if the executive branch didn’t have the power to “determine” if anyone (including citizens) are unlawful enemy combatants. Also any person (including citizens) can be detained with no rights while their status is being “determined”. The Military Commissions Act is a scary, scary piece of legislation.
Now that’s more like the seige I’ve come to expect. Well done young man! The ice cream stand thing was a nice touch. At least admit you’re exaggerating for effect. I understand the issue pretty well (as well as my top 10 law school education, 9th circuit clerkship and 20 years of practice permits I should say), and I’m far from a liberal. Have a tremendous weekend big guy.
Frontierguy, I beleive you and I have asked similar questions to people about to be deported and you are absolutely right. They will all claim fear (none of it credible, of course) and the courts will let them walk.
dakine said:
Yawn. A lawyer, now I know why I called you a useless pig. Yeh, I too have several degrees from top 10 engineering schools and always at the top of my class; I certainly don’t know what your point is. If you happen to know something about habeas corpus you should share it instead of acting like a runt.
Ed Mamoud – Yes I read the article earlier. I was one of the ones who said McCain would support this. Clearly he does not or has done an about face. Either way, I applaud his reaction.
I still won’t vote for him though. He has no way to get another Scalia or Roberts or anyone even close to them through. His little gang of 14 saw to that. With a Dem controlled Senate, fuggetaboutit.
This decision is the worst US Supreem court decision since the Dredd Scott decision of 1858…
Goldwater Knight:
9th circuit says it all.
Gadfly.
The above is an example of what happens when the ability to write a term paper is valued over a need to use common sense. This decision is dumb as it gets.
It will all but destroy our ability to gather intelligence-unless we form secret Star Chambers on-site and out of sight of the libs for these foreigners who do not have constitutional rights in the first place
The alternative is just don’t take prisoners…
I would love to have seen the above rationale used in the aftermath of Pearl Harbor….Back when this country had balls to deal with the Japanese attack..or was Pearl Harbor just a Shinto celebration gone haywire???
In any event Ed, “Mr. National Security”
John McCain kissed in with the libs with that insipid “Close Gitmo” and “no torture” stuff so in part this decision is a manifestation of his own words, and his reaction is nothing more than election year politicking of the worst variety.
John McCain has not only been offensive to Conservatives on other issues including this one, he is now “crying wolf” with his newfound opposition to this decision and no one believes his flip-flopping, and furthermore John McCain should have known better frankly.
But for so much of the Beltway, governance is just a game for Gain.
His “Gang of 13″ memebership is going to haunt him starting now.
My head is still shaking in frustration over this situation…
Though the military will never quit until told to do so, I have to ask this question:
“Why should a man, however valorous, stand and die while right and left, fore and rear, his fellows deserted him?”
- From Steven Pressfield’s “Gates of Fire”
If our country is no longer with the military in this fight, as evidenced by two of three branches of government, then what’s the point? But then again, my mission in life right now is to prove both of those branches wrong, to prove wrong the weaklings of our government, and defeat this enemy, the same enemy Leonidas fought.
“First then, no matter what, the
SpartansAmericans will never accept your terms. This would reduceGreecethe United States to slavery. They are sure to join battle with you even if all the rest of theGreeksfree world surrendered to you. As forSpartanAmerican numbers, do not ask how many or few they are, hoping for them to surrender. For if a thousand of them should take the field, they will meet you in battle, and so will any other number, whether it is less than this, or more.”seige, my point is that you’re talking out of your ass on a subject you’re not qualified to speak to. Plus, you’re about the biggest tool on this site. How is it possible that a graduate of a top 10 engineering program can’t even spell his own handle? Seriously? BTW, guys like you consider lawyers to be “useless pigs” right up to the point where they need one. Pocket protector wearing geek.