In a strong rebuke to the Bush administrations, the Supreme Court ruled this morning that the Bush administration violated U.S. law as well as the Geneva Conventions in setting up military tribunals for the detainees at Guantanamo Bay.
The case is Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (not to be confused with Hamdi v. Rumsfeld decided in 2004).
I wish I had more time to write about this now, but I'm "hella" busy with course work to renew my teaching certificate. So far, it has made for a not-so-happy and carefree summer vacation. Anyway, I'll try to post more on all of the recent decisions. The Court adjourned this morning until the first Monday in October.
To start with, you can read the stories in the New York Times or the Seattle Times.
2 comments:
I'm just glad the Court upheld the basic principle of separation of powers - notice that the ruling did say the Congress could authorize military commissions - it is just not within the President's authority to do this by himself. I've downloaded the Court's opinion - it is very long, but I'm looking forward to reading it.
While I do agree with Andrew on how were always wanting the president to do more and take more authority (we as in Americans in general, not necessarily me), I think that torturing suspected terrorists and then holding "trial" by tribunal doesn't necessarily protect us more. I especially think that the president should be allowed to make this decision all by himself. So, I, like Mr. Coraggio, am glad that the court further enforced separation of powers, and showed bush that he can't really do what he wants, even if he did appoint two of the members of the Supreme Court.
Post a Comment