Five, Wrong --- On Hamdan

National Review online ^ | June 30, 2006 | John Eastman

[khnyny]

The Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, enacted last December, gives the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., exclusive jurisdiction to review habeas-corpus petitions from the terrorists detained at Guantanamo Bay. The act also expressly provides that, other than that court, “no court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider . . . an application for a writ of habeas corpus filed by or on behalf of an alien detained by the Department of Defense at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba . . .” Legislative word-smithing does not get much clearer than that. Equally clear is Congress’s authority to restrict the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court; Article III, Section 2, of the Constitution describes that the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is subject to “such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.”

[CyberAnt]

For another opinion, go to http://www.mullings.com and read what Rich Galen wrote about the ruling.

This was NOT a win for the dems or the terrorists.

[khnyny]

Thanks.

[Mother Mary]

Thanks for posting this informative article.

[khnyny]

You are more than welcome.

[khnyny]

This is good too.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZjdkMGMzZjczNWM3ZjI5YTA3YTkwOTgyNzY5OWY3NTE=


[That when Congress enacted a statute in December 2005 providing that “no court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider” habeas-corpus petitions from detainees at Guantanamo, without exception or qualification, it really meant to include an exception that all detainees whose lawyers were clever enough to file petitions before the statute’s enactment could still press their claims, and the Court will act on that exception that Congress surely intended but did not say.]

[TSchmereL]

If it is true, as the President said that the "Hamdan decision was the way forward," and that he would work with Congress to "have a tribunal to hold people to account" while meeting the Court's directive, the five liberals on the Supreme Court have miscalculated again.

When you shoot the king, you better kill him.

Hamdan was a dud and it has raised the ire of millions of Americans. Many will hold someone to account for it in November. Liberals have an even bigger target on their backs.

[Jim Verdolini]

What do you do when the co-equal branch, the Supreme Court, absolutely refuses to act IAW the law or recognize limits on its power?

Apparently we let it pass as neither the President nor the Congress has told the court to pack sand.

[MountainMenace]

Good summary. I agree with his conclusions that impending legislation to get GWB what he needs will be a further embarressment to Dems. Let's hope so.

[jess35]

The Congress did tell them to pack sand when they limited the court's jurisdiction on Hamdan. Unfortunately, they don't have the guts to stand up and tell the SCOTUS today they've overstepped their authority.