The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled 5-3 against the Bush Administration in the Hamdan case.
The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that President Bush overstepped his authority in ordering military war crimes trials for Guantanamo Bay detainees.
The ruling, a rebuke to the administration and its aggressive anti- terror policies, was written by Justice John Paul Stevens, who said the proposed trials were illegal under U.S. law and Geneva conventions.
....
The vote was split 5-3, with moderate Justice Anthony M. Kennedy joining the court's liberal members in ruling against the Bush administration. Chief Justice John Roberts, named to the lead the court last September by Bush, was sidelined in the case because as an appeals court judge he had backed the government over Hamdan.
More later after the ruling becomes available.
The ruling can be read here.
Via Michelle Malkin:
U.S. Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Jon Kyl (R-AZ) today issued the following statement on the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on the Hamdan case:
"We are disappointed with the Supreme Court’s decision. However, we believe the problems cited by the Court can and should be fixed.
"It is inappropriate to try terrorists in civilian courts. It threatens our national security and places the safety of jurors in danger. For those reasons and others, we believe terrorists should be tried before military commissions.
"In his opinion, Justice Breyer set forth the path to a solution of this problem. He wrote, ‘Nothing prevents the president from returning to Congress to seek the authority he believes necessary.’
"We intend to pursue legislation in the Senate granting the Executive Branch the authority to ensure that terrorists can be tried by competent military commissions. Working together, Congress and the administration can draft a fair, suitable, and constitutionally permissible tribunal statute."
So in short, it's a mixed bag - the Supreme Court made a bad ruling that undermines the authority of the Commander in Chief during wartime, but they left open a door to allow Congress to rectify the problem the Court created today. Congress should act quickly to do so. There's a war on - trying to give amnesty to illegal aliens and stopping a few hippies from burning the flag can wait a week or two.
Those activist judges! How dare they say we're in a state of war and apply the Geneva convention!
Comment by Michael Hampton — June 29, 2006 @ 8:37 am June 29, 2006
Looks like a vote for the Rule of Law and Separation of Powers to me!
al Qaeda cannot defeat the US; only the US can defeat the US, by abandoning our heritage of freedom and respect for individual rights. This seems like a good decision for all Americans.
As a former Navy Pilot and Navy Legal Officer, I have been wondering for several years where our government was going with this apparently illegal detention of these ?terrorists? ?drivers? ?cooks? that were captured under widely varying and sometimes suspicious circumstances. Hoperfully this decision will give the government the fig-leaf it needs to finally try these detainees, or free them.
Cheers
Comment by NavyHelo — June 29, 2006 @ 1:29 pm June 29, 2006
Nonsense. We don't abandon our heritage of freedom or respect for individual rights by trying enemy combatants captured on the battlefield using a military commission.
The Supreme Court left open the possibility of correcting this situation by congressional legislation. Hopefully congress will act quickly to give the president the authority he needs, so Hamdan and his fellow terrorists can be tried at Gitmo.
Comment by The Editors — June 29, 2006 @ 5:08 pm June 29, 2006
Yes, how dare they apply the Geneva Convention when a clear reading says it does not apply to al Qaeda terrorists.
But of course for liberals all documents, treaties, books, etc., are "living, breathing documents" and thus they say whatever liberals want them to say.
Comment by The Editors — June 29, 2006 @ 7:50 pm June 29, 2006