Here Thomas destroys the Geneva Convention Argument
"In any event, the Courts argument is too clever by half. The judicial nonenforceability of the Geneva Conventions derives from the fact that those Conventions have exclusive enforcement mechanisms, see Eisentrager, supra, at 789, n. 14, and this, too, is part of the law of war. The Courts position thus rests on the assumption that Article 21s reference to the laws of war selectively incorporates only those aspects of the Geneva Conventions that the Court finds convenient, namely, the substantive requirements of Common Article 3, and not those aspects of the Conventions that the Court, for whatever reason, disfavors, namely the Conventions exclusive diplomatic enforcement scheme. The Court provides no account of why the partial incorporation of the Geneva Conventions should extend only so farand no furtherbecause none is available beyond its evident preference to adjudicate those matters that the law of war, through the Geneva Conventions, consigns exclusively to the political branches."
You know, everybody loves the Scalia dissents, but Thomas has a pretty poisoned pen himself.
Thanks for posting this Tort. Great stuff.