Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: All
Scotusblog musings on Legislative intent re: jurisdictional issue ...

Analysis: Hamdan and a few minutes in the Senate

05:17 PM | Lyle Denniston

In the few minutes that it took the Senate to complete passage of the Detainee Treatment Act last Dec. 21, little was said in the chamber beyond a round of congratulations for a job well done. But the Congressional Record for that very brief legislative effort now runs to 21 pages, with three columns of small print per page. And out of that Record of what was not said but nevertheless was recorded has emerged a debate that may go a long way to influence how the Supreme Court and the D.C. Circuit Court resolve the next big controversy arising out of the war on terrorism. ...

That running controversy in two courts begins, of course, with a dispute over the meaning of the words Congress chose to write into the new detainee law. Detainees' lawyers read it as clearly indicating that Congress did not intend to wipe out existing cases pending in the courts when the Act passed; they have a key Senator and a number of amici on their side. The governmen's lawyers are just as insistent that the Act clearly does, indeed, end all habeas jurisdiction; they have two key Senators and a number of amici on their side.

It could be, of course, that either the Supreme Court or the D.C. Circuit will find the answer in the language alone; Justice Antonin Scalia, for one, is almost certain to want to focus solely on the words themselves, believing -- as he does -- that legislative history is not dependable history at all. But other Justices, and Circuit Court judges, may not be satisfied with the words alone and may want to look into legislative history. Figuring prominently in that history are those 21 pages of the Congressional Record for last Dec. 21.

Final Senate consideration of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 -- containing the detainee law -- was perfunctory. No one debated the meaning of any provision in the bill, and it won passage without a recorded roll-call vote.


20 posted on 03/23/2006 4:22:42 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]


To: All
A couple additional links ...

http://www.hamdanvrumsfeld.com/ <- Briefs
Judge Rules in Favor of Guantanamo Lawyer <- Adem case

21 posted on 03/26/2006 2:58:09 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson