Find » Legal » Bush Administration Not Happy with ...

Bush Administration Not Happy with Boumediene Supreme Court Ruling

By Roy Barnes, published Jun 13, 2008
Published Content: 303  Total Views: 408,450  Favorited By: 16 CPs
Embed:  
Rating: 4.2 of 5
President Bush isn't happy that the Supreme Court ruled against his administration 5-4 in the Boumediene case, according to an AP article. His reaction to the Boumediene case in Rome, Italy: "We'll abide by the court's decision. That doesn't mean I have to agree with it." The Supreme Court ruled in the Boumediene case that those foreigners who are being held as terrorism suspects at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, have the right to challenge their detention in America's civilian courts.

How Will This Court Decision Affect the Bush Administration's War On Terror?

Most of the 270 men at Gitmo have not even been charged with any crime, and the terrorism suspects have even been confined there for years. This includes Osama Bin Laden's ex-driver Salim Hamdan, according to the AP article.

I think this Boumediene ruling is a good decision by the court, because it's ridiculous that people aren't given a speedy trial. We as the United States of America are supposed to have a higher moral and legal standard. This means that when foreigners are suspected of committing crimes against us, then the legal process, military or civilian, needs to assure the suspects of speedy trials instead of holding them at Gitmo for years on end. Let them be tried fairly and quickly.

If the suspects are guilty, then punish them, if they are not, then let them go. Why should the taxpayers be paying to hold suspects years on end without resolving anything, especially if there's a chance some of those folks aren't guilty? The Bush Administration should quit playing games and try terrorism suspects soon after they are apprehended, and show the world why America is a fair country over human rights. Holding suspects at Gitmo for years on end without a trial has nothing to do with finding terrorism suspects or fighting terrorism.

The Boumediene ruling may start the process rolling for all the Gitmo suspects to finally get some kind of trial in the courts, but I'm not going to hold my breath since the wheels of justice turn slowly, but it's a start.

Bush Administration Not Happy with Boumediene Supreme Court Ruling
Resources
Comments
Comments 1 - 3 of 3
 
 
"Most of the 270 men at Gitmo have not even been charged with any crime" You can't charge enemy fighters with a crime unless they have committed a war crime. Thousands of German soldiers were detained in WWII without trial and were not charged with crimes, and they were imprisoned until the end of the war. This ruling if applied then would have given all of them habeas corpus if they are being held in a place of "de facto" American control -- basically all of occupied Germany and mainland USA. All a soldier has to do is deny that he is a soldier, and he would be able to sue in American courts to get himself freed. Once freed, he would have been able to return to the battlefield. Sounds crazy? It is. The judicial branch has overstepped its bounds once again -- inserting themselves into the areas of war and foreign affairs, and undercutting what Congress and the President have decided.

Posted on 06/14/2008 at 1:06:35 AM

 
While I AGREE with today's majority opinion that "all enemy combatants detained during a war, at least insofar as they are confined in an area away from the battlefield, [but] over which the United States exercises 'absolute and indefinite' control, may seek a writ of habeas corpus in federal court," I also AGREE with Chief Justice Roberts (and his fellow dissenters) that the Writ can be suspended in time of war, such as the war on terror that we find ourselves involved in right now, and that suspension power belongs to Congress, such as Congress has exercised in this case, "as the Constitution surely allows Congress to [wield]." I guess one can REASONABLY conclude that the Court's Majority knew where they wanted to end up, and proceeded to get there, however s-l-o-w-l-y they weaved their way through precedential minefield! OsiSpeaks.com

Posted on 06/13/2008 at 11:06:44 PM

 
Good article, however, believe the Supreme Court screwed this one up. As foreigners, Constitutionally they really do not have the same 'privileges and immunities' as American citizens, and while humanely they should have a 'speedy' trial, the arguments you pose about the costs actually have 'upped' the ante, in that these civilian courts and lawyer fees will now be picked up by Americans..... Justice would have been served with 'speedy' military trials, as enemy combatants, whether civilian or not. The SCOTUS really screwed this one up in the actual determination they made, and also fact that this bogus ruling can now be used even to continue to afford illegals in this country such 'rights,' after criminal actions - rather than immediate deportation. What a mess.....

Posted on 06/13/2008 at 11:06:55 AM

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

Submit your own content on this or any topic. Get started »
Comments 1 - 3 of 3
 
Advertisment