SCOTUS rules on GITMO detainees

[Guest Cerebus]

The SCOTUS finally ruled on the Hamidi and foreign-born national cases today. Here's what we got:

 

Terror Detainees Win Right to U.S. Courts

 

By ANNE GEARAN, Associated Press Writer

 

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court delivered a mixed verdict Monday on the Bush administration's anti-terrorism policies, ruling that the U.S. government has the power to hold American citizens and foreign nationals without charges or trial, but that detainees can challenge their treatment in U.S. courts.

 

The administration had sought a more clear-cut endorsement of its policies than it got. The White House had claimed broad authority to seize and hold potential terrorists or their protectors for as long as the president saw fit — and without interference from judges or lawyers.

 

In both cases, the ruling was 6-3, although the lineup of justices was different in the two decisions.

 

Ruling in the case of American-born detainee Yaser Esam Hamdi, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor (news - web sites) said the court has "made clear that a state of war is not a blank check for the president when it comes to the rights of the nation's citizens."

 

Congress did give the president authority to hold Hamdi, a four-justice plurality of the court said, but that does not cancel out the basic right to a day in court.

 

The court ruled similarly in the case of about 600 foreign-born men held indefinitely at a U.S. Navy (news - web sites) prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The men can use American courts to contest their captivity and treatment, the high court said.

 

The Supreme Court sidestepped a third major terrorism case, ruling that a lawsuit filed on behalf of detainee Jose Padilla improperly named Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld instead of the much lower-level military officer in charge of the Navy brig in South Carolina where Padilla has been held for more than two years.

 

Padilla must refile a lawsuit challenging his detention in a lower court.

 

Steven R. Shapiro, legal director of the ACLU, called the rulings "a strong repudiation of the administration's argument that its actions in the war on terrorism are beyond the rule of law and unreviewable by American courts."

 

Now the question is, will thier writs of Habeas Corpus be approved? Stay tuned...

 

Edit: As Vyce points out, this ruling did not settle the Padilla case.

[Art Sandusky]

Spiffy, good to hear. It'll remain to be seen how many successfully contest their captivity though.

 

(I thought this said SCROTUM rules on GIZMO detainees when I glanced at it)

[Vyce]

Eh, a mixed bag for the administration. It upholds their policies. Not as much as would like, but in the long run, the authority to detain these men will remain. Especially since by the time their writs for habeas corpus get reviewed by the courts, they'll already have been in custody for a significant period of time anyway.

 

One thing of interest, though:

 

The Supreme Court sidestepped a third major terrorism case, ruling that a lawsuit filed on behalf of detainee Jose Padilla improperly named Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld instead of the much lower-level military officer in charge of the Navy brig in South Carolina where Padilla has been held for more than two years.

 

Way to go, SCROTUM - you pussed out again.