"The obvious and inevitable consequence of today's Supreme Court decision will be that terrorist killers presently in captivity, captured at the cost of American soldiers' lives and limbs, will be released instead of punished, and they will return to killing both Americans and others again."
...and:
"If Osama bin Laden, wearing no uniform, surrounded by children as human shields, and in mid-stroke while he's sawing the head off a captured American nurse, is captured by American soldiers tomorrow in Pakistan or Afghanistan, then his rights to use the federal writ of habeas corpus to guarantee him the protections afforded by the United States Constitution will be, so far as I can determine, indistinguishable from my own if I were arrested at my home by the Houston Police Department on a warrant for overdue parking tickets.
The Supreme Court has so ordered notwithstanding the fact that the people's lawful representatives — through statutes passed by their Congress, and signed into law by their president — had otherwise decreed."Chief Justice Roberts:
"Today the Court strikes down as inadequate the most generous set of procedural protections ever afforded aliens detained by this country as enemy combatants. The political branches crafted these procedures amidst an ongoing military conflict, after much careful investigation and thorough debate.
The Court rejects them today out of hand, without bothering to say what due process rights the detainees possess, without explaining how the statute fails to vindicate those rights, and before a single petitioner has even attempted to avail himself of the law’s operation."
Justice Scalia:
"THE CHIEF JUSTICE’s dissent, which I join, shows that the procedures prescribed by Congress in the Detainee Treatment Act provide the essential protections that habeas corpus guarantees; there has thus been no suspension of the writ, and no basis exists for judicial intervention beyond what the Act allows.
My problem with today’s opinion is more fundamental still: The writ of habeas corpus does not, and never has, run in favor of aliens abroad; the Suspension Clause thus has no application, and the Court’s intervention in this military matter is entirely ultra vires [i.e., beyond the Supreme Court's own power]."
Beldar again:
"Make no mistake about it: This was a naked, arrogant power grab of wartime, war-fighting power by the liberal wing of the Supreme Court. This is Anthony Kennedy, John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, David Souter, and Stephen Breyer doing their dead-level best — not to protect you and me from the terrorists, but to protect the terrorists — and to prevent Congress and the president from protecting you and me!"
....and:
"Our enemies will never defeat us. We have the power to defeat ourselves, however, and today's decision by the Supreme Court is a terrible, tragic step toward such a defeat.
What will you do in November? Will you help accelerate these judicial power-grabs? Or will you help reverse them?"
And yet we CONTINUE to read the Usual Suspects' babble, dribble, drool, and spew on this atrocity, evidenced here, as linked by (who else?) the King of the Usual Suspects, our pal Ed.
We will never be pushed out of Iraq.
ReplyDeleteWe may, however, be pulled out.
How does it make sense to deny ANYONE the right to habeus corpus when we criticize other governments for doing exactly what we are doing?
ReplyDelete"How does it make sense to deny ANYONE the right to habeus corpus when we criticize other governments for doing exactly what we are doing?"
ReplyDeleteWhat part of what Justice Scalia said
"The writ of habeas corpus does not, and never has, run in favor of aliens abroad; the Suspension Clause thus has no application, and the Court’s intervention in this military matter is entirely ultra vires [i.e., beyond the Supreme Court's own power]."
...do you not understand?
So what would you suggest? As the battle rages we call lawyers to the front line for the enemy to consult? Does a court have to declare them terrorists before a soldier can shoot and kill the enemy to save his own life?
ReplyDeleteAnd you spent how many years in combat??
“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 [majority of the Supreme] 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 [the Court’s ruling on Gitmo detainees] as a defeat for ‘the Bush administration.’ Really? I see it as a defeat for the nation.” —Mark Levin
ReplyDeleteAnd I certainly agree.
Hat Tip to Patriot PostUSA