WebSeitz/wikilog
z2006-06-30- Scotus Vs Bush Tribunals
Whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

(backlinks off) (map off)
(search off)
last edited by BillSeitz on Aug 11, 2007 5:20 am

The ruled that the administration couldn't use its [Military Tribunal] system for . "The executive is bound to comply with the that prevails in this jurisdiction," Justice [John Paul Stevens], writing for the 5-to-3 majority, said at the end of a 73-page opinion that in sober tones shredded each of the administration's arguments, including the assertion that had stripped the court of jurisdiction to decide the case. A principal but by no means the only flaw the court found in the commissions was that the president had established them without Congressional authorization... The majority opinion... indicated that finding a legislative solution would not necessarily be easy. In an important part of the ruling, the court held that a provision of the known as Common Article 3 applies to the Guantanamo detainees and is enforceable in [Federal Court] for their protection... The opinion made it clear that while this provision does not necessarily require the full range of protections of a civilian court or a military court martial, it does require observance of protections for defendants that are missing from the rules the administration has issued for military commissions. The flaws the court cited were the failure to guarantee the defendant the right to attend the trial and the prosecution's ability under the rules to introduce hearsay evidence, unsworn testimony, and evidence obtained through . See .

Perhaps the only silver lining for the administration was that the decision did not affect the government's authority to keep terrorism suspects at or elsewhere.

(Majority: [John Paul Stevens], [Ruth Bader Ginsberg], [David Souter], [Anthony Kennedy], [Stephen Breyer]. Minority: [Antonin Scalia], [Clarence Thomas], [Samuel Alito].)

Many related Administration policies may be at risk. (e.g. )

President announced, "We intend to appeal." (hehe)

The plans to push for a ruling, perhaps as an empty gesture for the -s. A challenge for Democrats.


 




Bill Seitz, fluxent at gmail dot com, Weblog