Today, in a 5-4 ruling, with Anthony Kennedy providing the swing vote, the Supreme Court has ruled that foreign terrorism suspects detained at Guantanamo Bay do have the right to challenge their detention in US courts.
Or, as Kennedy put it:
"We hold these petitioners do have the habeas corpus privilege," Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the court majority in the 70-page opinion.He said that Congress had failed to create an adequate alternative for the prisoners held at the U.S. military base in Cuba to contest their detention.
SCOTUSblog elaborates on the decision.
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.
You can read the entire ruling HERE.
This is actually the third time the court has ruled against the administration on this issue, although no decision has yet led to hearings for detainees and it's not clear that this one will either.
I can't express how satisfying it is to see the dead-enders Roberts, Alito, Thomas and Scalia in the minority. Check out this graf from Roberts's dissent. Who's writing this shit, Sean Hannity?
In dissent, Chief Justice John Roberts criticized his colleagues for striking down what he called "the most generous set of procedural protections ever afforded aliens detained by this country as enemy combatants."
Soon, if all goes right, the Supreme Court will be all conservatives have and it appears, at least on this crucial issue, they don't even have that.
Update [2008-6-12 11:48:38 by Todd Beeton]:Adam B has a good analysis over at dailyKos including this graf from Kennedy's majority opinion:
It bears repeating that our opinion does not address the content of the law that governs petitioners’ detention. That is a matter yet to be determined. We hold that petitioners may invoke the fundamental procedural protections of habeas corpus. The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times. Liberty and security can be reconciled; and in our system they are reconciled within the framework of the law. The Framers decided that habeas corpus, a right of first importance, must be a part of that framework, a part of that law.
|
|
|
Permalink :: 20 Comments :: Post a Comment
|
In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.
If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.
