[Congressman Billybob]

The full opinions are not yet available on the website I use to review Supreme Court decisions. However, from the press accounts, this case does NOT reverse the

Quirin case, which ruled unanimously in favor of military tribunals. Instead, this case says that Congress has not given proper authority to the President to do this.

That said, the proper reaction for the White House is to put the matter into Congress, and ask that it act with dispatch. In the meantime, the prisoners can continue to be held in accord with the Law of War -- that captured enemy can be held without trials for the duration of the conflict.

P.S. Interested in a Freeper in Congress? Keep in touch with me.

Congressman Billybob

Latest article: "Tribal Loyalties and Public Lies"

[tort_feasor]

Full opinon in pdf

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/05pdf/05-184.pdf

More Scalia:

"Though it does not squarely address the issue, the Court hints ominously that “the Government’s preferred reading” would “rais[e] grave questions about Congress’ authority to impinge upon this Court’s appellate jurisdiction,particularly in habeas cases.”" (Citation omitted)
"It is not clear how there could be any such lurking questions, in light of the aptly named “Exceptions Clause” of Article III, §2, which, in making our appellate jurisdiction subject to “such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make,” explicitly permits exactly what Congress has done here."

[AgThorn]

I absolutely concur that the next step is to get Congress to expeditiously support the needs of handling these Gitmo criminals.

I was thinking before this final ruling pointed to this needed next step, wouldn't another option be for us to return these creeps to the countries we found them in for their summary court convictions as well? i.e. Afghanistan and Iraq? Or do we not trust those governments yet to do 'the right thing'?

[AgThorn]

I absolutely concur that the next step is to get Congress to expeditiously support the needs of handling these Gitmo criminals.

I was thinking before this final ruling pointed to this needed next step, wouldn't another option be for us to return these creeps to the countries we found them in for their summary court convictions as well? i.e. Afghanistan and Iraq? Or do we not trust those governments yet to do 'the right thing'?

[KC Burke]

ping me after you have read the decision and the dissents and posted your thoughts, if you would.

[colorado tanker]

CB, the key opinion seems to be Kennedy's concurrence, in which several libs also join. He doesn't go nearly as far as Stevens, and expressly does not join the parts of the opinion dealing with the Geneva Convention, for example.

Basically, he seems to agree the President has the power to convene tribunals, but thinks the constitution of the tribunals and their procedures do not conform sufficiently to the UCMJ requirements for tribunals. If I'm reading this correctly, DOD could re-write the rules to conform more closely to the rules applicable to Courts-Martial, and use military judges, and they'd be OK. Is that how you see it?