Find » Legal » White House Loses Boumediene Case: ...

White House Loses Boumediene Case: Supreme Court Sides Against Bush, Protects Habeas Corpus

A Victory for Habeas Corpus, but Unanswered Questions Remain

By Tina Molly Lang, published Jun 12, 2008
Published Content: 97  Total Views: 85,893  Favorited By: 98 CPs
Embed:  
Rating: 4.8 of 5
The Supreme Court has sided against the Bush Administration in the Boumediene case, saying that the White House cannot refuse prisoners habeas corpus unless it does so under the Constitution's Suspension Clause. The Suspension Clause only allows for suspension in cases of rebellion or invasion. In effect, foreign terrorism suspects being held at Guantanamo Bay will have constitutional rights to appeal their detentions.

Boumediene vs. Bush challenged the legality of Lakhar Boumediene's detention at Guantanamo Bay. Lakhar Boumediene is an Algerian native and naturalized citizen of Bosnia. He was arrested after Sept. 11 when he was suspected of plotting an attack against the United States Embassy in Sarajevo.

The Supreme Court voted 5-4 in favor of Boumediene.

White House loses Boumediene Case: The Supreme Court decision

Anthony Kennedy, the traditional swing voter of the Supreme Court, wrote the majority opinion for Boumediene vs. Bush. Citing the 1803 Marbury vs. Madison case, he wrote that "To hold that the political branches may switch the Constitution on or off at will would lead to a regime in which they, not this court, say 'what the law is,' " Kennedy also argued that the Suspension Clause "protects the rights of the detained by a means consistent with the essential design of the Constitution. It ensures that, except during periods of formal suspension, the Judiciary will have a time-tested device, the writ, to maintain the 'delicate balance of governance' that is itself the surest safeguard of liberty." Joining Anthony Kennedy were the traditionally liberal justices John Paul Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Stephen Breyer.

On the dissenting side of Boumediene vs. Bush were traditionally conservative justices John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. Antonin Scalia argued that America was "at war with radical Islamists," and that the ruling "will almost certainly cause more Americans to get killed."

White House loses Boumediene Case: Effects of the Supreme Court Decision

White House Loses Boumediene Case: Supreme Court Sides Against Bush, Protects Habeas Corpus

U.S. Supreme Court building.

Credit: Jeff Kubina

Copyright: Wikimedia Commons

Takeaways
  • Under the Boumediene ruling, foreign nationals detained at Guantanamo will have habeas corpus rights
  • In a divided Supreme Court, moderate Anthony Kennedy was the swing vote.
  • The Supreme Court ruling on Boumediene demonstrates the effectiveness of checks and balances.
Comments
Showing Comments 1 - 15 of 26
Next >>
 
Very well written article. I would just say that if we start riding roughshod over the Constituion then there is nothing left to fight for, the country will already be lost.

Posted on 07/12/2008 at 5:07:23 PM

 
Thanks for this report, Tina. This was an unfortunate decision. Many people don't understand that the Rules of War agreed upon by many countries including the U.S. after WWII has little to do with habeas corpus. The Rules of War (or Laws of War as also called) have been denegrated and stomped on by this decision, because they applied to showing consideration toward captured soldiers of a COUNTRY'S ARMY taking orders from a country's legal militia - not guerilla terrorists who run around doing what they want to do. hMMM, I may write an article about that!

Posted on 06/28/2008 at 12:06:47 PM

 
Great report

Posted on 06/23/2008 at 5:06:40 AM

 
Interesting report, good article.

Posted on 06/17/2008 at 3:06:51 AM

 
Very good job on this!

Posted on 06/16/2008 at 6:06:52 PM

 
Very good reporting. Very sticky situation.

Posted on 06/16/2008 at 10:06:19 AM

 
Interesting

Posted on 06/15/2008 at 8:06:55 PM

 
Great reporting!

Posted on 06/14/2008 at 9:06:13 PM

 
Great job on mentioning the system of checks and balances in this article!

Posted on 06/13/2008 at 10:06:39 AM

 
Nice reporting!

Posted on 06/13/2008 at 7:06:37 AM

 
Great report!!!!!!!!

Posted on 06/13/2008 at 6:06:28 AM

 
Great reporting here. Keep it up********

Posted on 06/13/2008 at 5:06:44 AM

 
nice write up

Posted on 06/13/2008 at 5:06:27 AM

 
I'm glad to hear this news, nice write up :) Sheri

Posted on 06/12/2008 at 11:06:56 PM

 
Great job on this

Posted on 06/12/2008 at 10:06:04 PM

Type in Your Comments Below - (1000 characters left)
Your name:

Submit your own content on this or any topic. Get started »
Showing Comments 1 - 15 of 26
Next >>
Most Commented On