In a major rebuke to the Bush Administration,the Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Bush violated U.S. law and the Geneva Conventions in ordering military tribunals for Guantánamo Bay detainees.
The Court decided the case, called Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 5 - 3. Justice John Paul Stevens wrote the 73-page majority opinion, which held that the President "is bound to comply with the rule of law." Stevens was joined by Justices Breyer, Ginsberg, Kennedy, and Souter. Justice Kennedy's concurring opinion stated that "Trial by military commission raises separation-of-powers concerns of the highest order," and that the resulting "[c]oncentration of power (in the executive branch) puts personal liberty in peril of arbitrary action by officials, an incursion the Constitution's three-part system is designed to avoid."" Justices Alito, Scalia, and Thomas dissented. Justice Thomas warned that his colleagues' willingness "to second-guess the determination of the political branches that these conspirators must be brought to justice is both unprecedented and dangerous". Chief Justice John Roberts recused himself from the case, because he had supported the Administration's position as an appeals court judge.
This ruling marks a second major defeat for the Administration before the high court regarding the treatment of terrorism suspects. The Court has previously rejected President Bush's authority to detain terrorism suspects indefinitely without trial.
Under pressure mounting international pressure, President Bush has told reporters "I'd like to close Guantánamo," but "I also recognize that we're holding some people that are darn dangerous."
The Court's ruling in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld does not however require that the Guantánamo Camp's closure. Instead, the ruling means that the U.S. will be have to find another way of trying Guantánamo detainees: for example, by a U.S. military court martial or civilian trial, by turning over detainees to their home countries for trial, or by some other means approved by Congress.
Four-hundred sixty persons are currently held in the facility.
X-posted to
nikkinewsnet.
The Court decided the case, called Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 5 - 3. Justice John Paul Stevens wrote the 73-page majority opinion, which held that the President "is bound to comply with the rule of law." Stevens was joined by Justices Breyer, Ginsberg, Kennedy, and Souter. Justice Kennedy's concurring opinion stated that "Trial by military commission raises separation-of-powers concerns of the highest order," and that the resulting "[c]oncentration of power (in the executive branch) puts personal liberty in peril of arbitrary action by officials, an incursion the Constitution's three-part system is designed to avoid."" Justices Alito, Scalia, and Thomas dissented. Justice Thomas warned that his colleagues' willingness "to second-guess the determination of the political branches that these conspirators must be brought to justice is both unprecedented and dangerous". Chief Justice John Roberts recused himself from the case, because he had supported the Administration's position as an appeals court judge.
This ruling marks a second major defeat for the Administration before the high court regarding the treatment of terrorism suspects. The Court has previously rejected President Bush's authority to detain terrorism suspects indefinitely without trial.
Under pressure mounting international pressure, President Bush has told reporters "I'd like to close Guantánamo," but "I also recognize that we're holding some people that are darn dangerous."
The Court's ruling in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld does not however require that the Guantánamo Camp's closure. Instead, the ruling means that the U.S. will be have to find another way of trying Guantánamo detainees: for example, by a U.S. military court martial or civilian trial, by turning over detainees to their home countries for trial, or by some other means approved by Congress.
Four-hundred sixty persons are currently held in the facility.
X-posted to