Posts Tagged ‘Habeas Corpus’

Old Hickory

Published: June 16th, 2008

The right wing freakout over the recent Supreme Court decision to permit habeas petitions for Gitmo detainees reached a skull-splitting crescendo today. Mike “gamecock” DeVine, so-called “Legal Editor” for the site Minority Report, posted the most laughably insane and transparently stupid argument ever crafted with a keyboard.

In a blog post titled “Ignore the Court,” cross-posted over at Redstate, the “GameCock” argued the following:

Today’s infamous 5-4 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court granting terrorists the right to an O.J. trial in U.S. civilian courts cries out for the present Chief Executive to so paraphrase Old Hickory’s similar defiance of John Marshall 176 years ago with respect to removal of the Cherokee from Georgia.

John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it.”

The nation survived President Andrew Jackson’s defense of his constitutional executive powers against the first Judicial Oligarch. Should President Bush succumb to Justice Kennedy’s attempted coup to assume the role of Commander in Chief, it will be much harder for our nation to survive, much less thrive, as it has since 1832.

Beyond the fascistic, mindlessly authoritarian vision DeVine articulates for our country, I can only hope that he failed history class. Otherwise, he’s seriously advocating the Indian Removal Act and the Trail of Tears as positive models for presidential behavior. That story is one of the darkest stains on the fabric of American history.

I suppose it’s only fitting that someone use it to justify unlimited, unchecked, and arbitrary executive detention — probably the most un-American and un-democratic thing that I can imagine.

Supreme Court Restores Habeas

Published: June 12th, 2008

A bright spot of green today in the news:

The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that foreign terrorism suspects held at Guantanamo Bay have rights under the Constitution to challenge their detention in U.S. civilian courts.

In its third rebuke of the Bush administration’s treatment of prisoners, the court ruled 5-4 that the government is violating the rights of prisoners being held indefinitely and without charges at the U.S. naval base in Cuba. The court’s liberal justices were 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.”

UPDATE:

From McClatchy:

The Supreme Court’s landmark Guantanamo Bay decision Thursday could free foreign prisoners while it inflames Capitol Hill.

Some consequences are immediate, for a case that’s big legally, politically and militarily. Within hours of the court’s decision in the combined cases known as Boumediene v. Bush and Al Odah v. United States, attorneys were preparing to demand hearings for detainees long held without charges.

These habeas corpus hearings before federal judges will force the Bush administration to reveal its evidence and expose publicly how the detainees have been treated. Some attorneys think that the administration simply will start releasing detainees to avoid the potentially embarrassing hearings altogether.

But before everyone reaches for the party favors, the sad truth is that it is entirely possible that these individuals are guilty of a host of criminal acts. The truly despicable thing is that this administration jeopardized the prosecution of all of these individuals by the use of torture and hearsay evidence procured through torture. All their evidence is contaminated– “fruit from the poisonous tree.” And now, to cover their own asses, they’d rather let potential terrorists go–without trial–to avoid being prosecuted themselves for ordering crimes against humanity.

We should all tell this administration to go Cheney itself.

UPDATE II:

Glenn Greenwald with a good question for all the authoritarian-craving conservatives who rejected the Supreme Court’s ruling yesterday:

[H]ow and why would any American object to the mere requirement that our Government prove that someone is guilty before we imprison them indefinitely or execute them? That is all that yesterday’s Supreme Court ruling required — not that detainees be released, but that their guilt be proven in a fair proceeding. The fact that the Right is so enraged by this basic requirement vividly reveals the authoritarian impulses which define them. After all, key McCain ally Lindsey Graham is actually threatening to amend our Constitution to limit the right of habeas corpus in response to yesterday’s ruling. The authoritarian radicalism of this faction can’t be overstated.

Recent Entries

Recent Comments

Network

Our Shop