The Supreme Court’s opinion on the Military Commissions Act was just issued today. I don’t have a copy of the opinion yet, but, according to news reports, by a 5-4 decision in which Justice Kennedy wrote the majority opinion, the Court ruled that detainees at Guantanamo Bay have the right to contest their detentions in the federal courts:
Supreme Court ruled Thursday that foreign terrorism suspects held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, are protected by the Constitution and can appeal their detention in U.S. civilian courts.
In a 5-4 ruling, the court also said that the Bush administration’s system for classifying detainees as enemy combatants does not meet basic legal standards.
Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the majority, said, “The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times.” He was joined by the court’s four more liberal justices, Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, David Souter and John Paul Stevens. […]
The Supreme Court now says the 2006 law unconstitutionally suspended habeas corpus — a prisoner’s right to challenge his detention. The ruling overturns a lower court decision that said the law was constitutional.
I’ll have more to say about this after I read the text of the opinion, hopefully by tomorrow. In the meantime, here is Senator Russ Feingold’s reaction to the decision posted at his website:
June 12, 2008
“Today’s Supreme Court decision is yet another stinging rebuke of the Bush administration’s extreme views on executive power. Time after time, the Supreme Court has rebuffed the administration’s attempts to undermine the Constitution, from its Rasul and Hamdi decisions in 2004 to its Hamdan decision in 2006. It is a testament to our system of government that the Court has rejected the habeas-stripping provisions of the Military Commissions Act and reaffirmed that the government does not have the power to detain people indefinitely and arbitrarily without judicial review. The writ of habeas corpus provides one of the most significant protections of human freedom against arbitrary government action ever created. We can and must fight terrorists without abandoning the principles on which our country was founded.”
If anyone has time to track down a copy of the opinion I’d be grateful. I have to run to take my daughter on some errands or I’d do it myself.
text [pdf] is here steven…BOUMEDIENE ET AL. v. BUSH PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATE, ET AL..
accordint to the NYT:
good hunting.
Thanks dada!
America Haters win again. Dammit.
It is a testament to our system of government that the Court has rejected the habeas-stripping provisions of the Military Commissions Act…”
Four justices accepted the doing away with habeus. Our system of government is hanging by a one-vote majority.
Here’s the SCOTUS opinion–
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/06-1195.pdf
Guess who the four dissenting Justices were?
Scalia, Alito, Roberts, and Thomas.
World-class assholes, all of them.
Thanks eagleye!
StevenD, there is a very interesting debate (actually a symposium) at opiniojuris . org regarding the decision. As far as I can tell, the decision has only territorial jurisdiction. That is to say, it only applies kto Guantanamo. Forget the black sites, and the prison ships.
Scalia “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”
h/t Brian Tamanaha @ Balkinization
What principal of ‘Strict Constructionism’ leads the Right Wing of the court to act this way? Lawyers in the house?
The cons are all going to start screaming “Judicial Activism!” over this when really, this is best example of a “strict constructionist” decision come out of this court yet.
Glenn Greenwald does a really nice write-up on it.
And I saw Bush comment on it in a press avail while in Rome. He looked visibly shaken by the ruling and said something like “Well, it doesn’t mean I have to agree with it” as though he doesn’t have to comply. Haha! He does have to comply! He also says he’s gonna try a new legislative approach (another unconstitutional bill to replace the parts of the Military Commissions Act that were struck down today.)
he sums it up nicely, and l particularly like the update:
the consequences of this election
screamspeak for themselves…This is why my head spins when I read or hear Democrats who supported Hillary say that they will vote for McCain over Obama. It is truly incomprehensible.
This might likely be the most important election in my lifetime in which I will have an opportunity to participate. The stakes for our country are that high. I am totally dumbfounded that anyone could not see the dire ramifications of a McCain presidency.
it’s boggles the mind.
This decision is a great step toward forcing the US back on the side of liberty. That said, it was also a split decision, one vote away from rejecting habeas corpus as an element of the nation’s legal foundation.
Scalia once again showed himself, along with the other predictable three, to be as far from being a “strict constructionist” as it’s possible to get. His dissent amounted to situational ethics of the worst kind. Scalia’s open contempt for the protections in the Constitution, as well as his stunning intellectual inferiority, call for a serious impeachment effort.
GEEZ!!!
I guess that tells you which side the presumptive fix is headed, eh?
Even the weak-minded Supremes know which way the wind is blowing, and they’re the ones who allowed the storm to happen the in the first place, way back in 2000.
Whadda buncha maroons!!!
i wouldn’t trust ’em with a fender bender case.
And the youngish guy in front!!! (Youngish compared most of the rest of the Geezerville residents, anyway.) He looks so tense that he’s about to have some sort of seizure!!!
Oh.
He did already?
Nevermind.
Emily
Hagel voted for the Military Commissions Act….
I know, let’s make him Sec. of State in an Obama cabinet!
nalbar
I’d flown the stars and stripes semi-regularly since I first became a homeowner back in 1998. But at some point in Bushco’s infringements upon our Constitution a couple of years ago (I forget exactly when) I’d put my flag away. For the past few years it’s flown only on Veteran’s and Memorial Days.
Today, the flag is up again, and it’s a beautiful, sunny breezy day. Maybe with the hindsight of a few years, or decades, June 12 will become known as Constitution Day.
Moderate at best, not liberal. Of course, when placed beside the others they are like golden angels.