Supreme Court Rules In Favor Of Guantanamo Detainee's

Discussion in 'Up to the Minute' started by gaia227, Jun 12, 2008.

  1. gaia227

    gaia227 I have never taken any exercise except sleeping an

    Messages:
    3,742
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25117953

    It is about time the US High Court acknowledges the country is violating people's human rights, civil liberties and constitutional rights. Good for them.
     
  2. Loading...


  3. Paladin

    Paladin Former Member

    Messages:
    2,395
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  4. Rino

    Rino Former Member

    Messages:
    3,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Are We Serious?
    They're at war, we're catching crooks. Link
     
  5. absinthe

    absinthe Former Member

    Messages:
    1,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    :clap:


    Thank you Supreme Court!
     
  6. Ntegrity

    Ntegrity Former Member

    Messages:
    4,139
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yeah, let's turn the poor guys loose and see what happens then.
     
  7. absinthe

    absinthe Former Member

    Messages:
    1,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ntegrity, they are being held indefinitely and without charges. Do you think that is fair to human beings?
     
  8. Paladin

    Paladin Former Member

    Messages:
    2,395
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    My concern is, if they weren't jihadists before, they'll probably become one once they're let out since they'll be pissed off enough.
     
  9. absinthe

    absinthe Former Member

    Messages:
    1,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Exactly!
     
  10. Ntegrity

    Ntegrity Former Member

    Messages:
    4,139
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Not for most human beings. But for them, it's fine with me.
     
  11. absinthe

    absinthe Former Member

    Messages:
    1,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    They are being held without charges and without the burden of proof, or even evidence. And it's still fine with you? What if one, just one of those people is innocent?
     
  12. Rino

    Rino Former Member

    Messages:
    3,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm with you. They are enemy combatants.

     
  13. Karole28

    Karole28 Former Member

    Messages:
    4,530
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Justice Scalia’s dissent says it all:

    Both the Chief Justice and Justice Antonin Scalia issued dissenting opinions, and all four dissenters joined in both dissents. In his dissent, Justice Scalia writes, “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.” Justice Scalia’s 25-page dissenting opinion concludes, “The Nation will live to regret what the Court has done today. I dissent.”
     
  14. Karole28

    Karole28 Former Member

    Messages:
    4,530
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Mark Levin:

    While I am still reviewing the 5-4 decision written by Anthony Kennedy, apparently giving GITMO detainees access to our civilian courts, at the outset I am left to wonder whether all POWs will now have access to our civilian courts? After all, you would think lawful enemy combatants have a better claim in this regard than unlawful enemy combatants. And if POWs have access to our civilian courts, how do our courts plan to handle the thousands, if not tens of thousands of cases, that will be brought to them in future conflicts?

    It has been the objective of the left-wing bar to fight aspects of this war in our courtrooms, where it knew it would have a decent chance at victory. So complete is the Court’s disregard for the Constitution and even its own precedent now that anything is possible. And what was once considered inconceivable is now compelled by the Constitution, or so five justices have ruled. I fear for my country. I really do. And AP, among others, reports this story as a defeat for “the Bush administration.” Really? I see it as a defeat for the nation
     
  15. Karole28

    Karole28 Former Member

    Messages:
    4,530
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Here’s the conclusion of Chief Justice John Robert’s dissent, pp. 27-28.

    So who has won? Not the detainees. The Court’s analysis leaves them with only the prospect of further litigation to determine the content of their new habeas right, followed by further litigation to resolve their particular cases,followed by further litigation before the D. C. Circuit— where they could have started had they invoked the DTA procedure. Not Congress, whose attempt to “determine— through democratic means—how best” to balance the security of the American people with the detainees’ liberty
    interests, see Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U. S. 557, 636 (2006) (BREYER, J., concurring), has been unceremoniously brushed aside.
    Not the Great Writ, whose majesty is hardly enhanced by its extension to a jurisdictionally quirky outpost, with no tangible benefit to anyone. Not the rule of law, unless by that is meant the rule of lawyers, who will now arguably have a greater role than military and intelligence officials in shaping policy for alien enemy combatants. And certainly not the American people, who today lose a bit more control over the conduct of this Nation’s foreign policy to unelected, politically unaccountable judges.

    I respectfully dissent.
     
  16. Karole28

    Karole28 Former Member

    Messages:
    4,530
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I hate to quote myself. But that part really is terrifying.
     
  17. absinthe

    absinthe Former Member

    Messages:
    1,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And military and intelligence officials are elected?
     
  18. Rino

    Rino Former Member

    Messages:
    3,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  19. absinthe

    absinthe Former Member

    Messages:
    1,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Lolz, not a comeback, I just didn't understand the fright over "unelected, politically unaccountable judges".
     
  20. Rino

    Rino Former Member

    Messages:
    3,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Because the law means nothing to these judges. They have now gone against what the lawmakers elected to make laws have established.
     
  21. curiositycat

    curiositycat The one thing that doesn't abide by majority rule

    Messages:
    4,948
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Everyone deserves due process of law. We have very little information as to who these folks are and what they, individually, have done. I will wait to make my decision until I know more.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice