Court Says Guantanamo Detainees Have Right to Challenge Detention

Damn right they do. They deserve justice and WE deserve the TRUTH. I have had enough of a government who thinks "We the people" don't know what is really going on.

Next

In this image reviewed by the U.S. Military, soldiers patrol the perimeter of the Camp Delta detention compound, which has housed foreign prisoners since 2002, at Guantanamo Bay U.S. Naval Base, in Cuba, Friday, June 6, 2008. (Brennan Linsley - AP)

In this June 2, 2008 file photo, reviewed by the U.S. Military, part of a legal defense team walk at Camp Justice, part of the legal complex of the U.S. Military Commissions, at Guantanamo Bay U.S. Naval Base, Cuba. The Supreme Court ruled Thursday, June 12, 2008, that foreign terrorism suspects held at Guantanamo Bay have rights under the Constitution to challenge their detention in U.S. civilian courts.

In this June 5, 2008 file photo, reviewed by the U.S. Military, members of a legal defense team walk at Camp Justice, part of the legal complex of the U.S. Military Commissions at Guantanamo Bay U.S. Naval Base, in Cuba. The Supreme Court ruled Thursday, June 12, 2008, that foreign terrorism suspects held at Guantanamo Bay have rights under the Constitution to challenge their detention in U.S. civilian courts. (AP Photo/Brennan Linsley, Pool, File) (Brennan Linsley - AP)

June 5, 2008 file photo, Reviewed by the U.S. Military, a U.S. trooper walks at Camp Justice, the legal complex of the U.S. Military Commissions, at Guantanamo Bay U.S. Naval Base, Cuba. The Supreme Court ruled Thursday, June 12, 2008, that foreign terrorism suspects held at Guantanamo Bay have rights under the Constitution to challenge their detention in U.S. civilian courts.

June 6, 2008 file photo, Reviewed by the U.S. Military, the sun rises over Camp Delta detention compound at Guantanamo Bay U.S. Naval Base, in Cuba. The Supreme Court ruled Thursday, June 12, 2008, that foreign terrorism suspects held at Guantanamo Bay have rights under the Constitution to challenge their detention in U.S. civilian courts. (AP Photo/Brennan Linsley, Pool, File) (Brennan Linsley - AP)

June 4, 2008 file photo. A U.S. trooper jogs at the tent city which makes up the legal complex of the U.S. Military Commissions, at Guantanamo Bay U.S. Naval Base, in Cuba. The Supreme Court ruled Thursday, June 12, 2008, that foreign terrorism suspects held at Guantanamo Bay have rights under the Constitution to challenge their detention in U.S. civilian courts. (AP Photo/Brennan Linsley, Pool, File) (Brennan Linsley - AP)

By Robert Barnes

Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, June 12, 2008; 12:28 PM

The Supreme Court today rebuked the Bush administration for a third time for its handling of the rights of terrorism detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, saying those in custody there have a constitutional right to challenge their captivity in federal courts.

By a 5 to 4 vote that brought strongly worded and remorseful dissents from the court's conservative justices, the majority held that an alternative procedure designed by the administration and Congress was inadequate to insure that the detainees, some of whom have been imprisoned for six years without a hearing, receive their day in court.

"The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times," Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote. "Liberty and security can be reconciled; and in our system they are reconciled within the framework of the law."

Justice Antonin Scalia took the unusual step of reading his dissent from the bench, calling the court's decision a "self-invited . . . incursion into military affairs," and was even stronger in a written dissent joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr.

"America is at war with radical Islamists," Scalia wrote, adding that the decision "will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed."

( Yes, of course because America started an unjust war with "radical Isalamists" so use our radical Christians who actually think we have enemies and let them deal with it )

On a recent trip to Tanzania, we took note on one street there is not one, two or three different faiths-There a lot more! Lutheran, Catholic and Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox, Muslim, Mormon- [Jesus Christ of the latter day Saints] They have no problem getting along with one another- so just where does the problem lie???

Roberts filed a separate dissent defending the alternative process to judicial hearings, calling them "the most generous set of procedural protections ever afforded aliens detained by this country as enemy combatants."

Kennedy, resuming the pivotal role he played in last term's decisions, sided with the court's liberal justices in deciding that detainees had a constitutional right to habeas corpus -- the chance to protest their detention before an independent judge. In 2004, the court held that the detainees had that right under statute, which Congress then changed.

Kennedy defended the role of the courts even in time of war. "The gravity of the separation-of-powers issues raised by these cases and the fact that these detainees have been denied meaningful access to a judicial forum for a period of years render these cases exceptional," he wrote.

It was not immediately clear how judicial review of the detainees will proceed.

The cases decided today, Boumediene v. Bush and Al Odah v. United States, were brought on behalf of 37 foreigners who remain among the approximately 300 detainees at Guantanamo Bay. All were captured on foreign soil and have been designated enemy combatants. They've proclaimed their innocence and for years have asked federal courts for a chance to challenge their captivity.

Some have been imprisoned since soon after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, and while they have won at the Supreme Court before, none has had a full hearing before a federal judge.

The court has confronted the issue before, ruling in 2004 in Rasul v. Bush that federal habeas corpus statutes extended to Guantanamo Bay detainees because of the unique control that the U.S. government has over the land.

The Republican-led Congress responded by changing the law, and after another adverse court ruling and at the urging of the Bush administration, it passed the Military Commissions Act in 2006. The legislation endorsed a military system for designating detainees as enemy combatants and for trying those charged with crimes. It also strictly limited judicial oversight.