Posted on 06/29/2007 2:48:03 PM PDT by neverdem
The United States Supreme Court reversed course today and agreed to hear claims of Guantanamo detainees that they have a right to challenge their detentions in American federal courts.
The decision, announced in a brief order released this morning, set the stage for a historic legal battle that appeared likely to shape debates in the Bush administration about when and how to close the detention center that has become a lightening rod for international criticism.
The exceptionally unusual order, which required votes from five of the nine justices, gave lawyers for detainees more than they had requested in a motion asking the justices to reconsider an April decision declining to review the same case. Lawyers for detainees had asked only that the court hold the case open for future consideration. Today’s order meant that the court would hear the case in its next term, perhaps by December.
Experts on the Supreme Court said the justices so rarely grant such motions for reconsideration that the order itself was significant. They said it signaled that the justices had determined they needed to resolve a new politically and legally significant Guantanamo issue, after two earlier Supreme Court decisions that have been sweeping setbacks for the administration’s detention policies.
Lawyers for many of the 375 men now held at the naval station on a scrubby corner of Cuba greeted the unexpected news with euphoria. They said it appeared the court was headed toward a ruling on one of the central principles of the administration’s detention policies: the claim that the government can hold “enemy combatants” without allowing them to use the ancient legal tool of the writ of habeas corpus, a legal action used in English law for centuries to challenge the legality of detentions.
“Finally, after nearly six years, the Supreme Court is..."
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
06-1195BOUMEDIENE, LAKHDAR, ET AL. V. BUSH PRESIDENT OF U.S., ET AL. with 06-1196 )AL ODAH, KHALED A. F., ET AL. V UNITED STATES, ET AL.The petitions for rehearing are granted. The orders entered April 2, 2007, denying the petitions for writs of certiorari are vacated. The petitions for writs of certiorari are granted. The cases are consolidated and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument. As it would be of material assistance to consult any decision in Bismullah, et al., v. Gates, No. 06-1197, and Parhat, et al., v. Gates, No. 06-1397, currently pending in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, supplemental briefing will be scheduled upon the issuance of any decision in those cases.
Gitmo ping
Somebody may have read Agamben.
It doesn't mean they've decided to rule in favor of the Gitmo jailbirds - it might, but it might not.
Is that spelled correctly? I couldn't find anything at the link in comment# 1.
He’s a political historian/philosopher. Most would not be interested in reading that even if they should.
Hunter is absolutely unapologetic about the way we are handling these dirtballs. In fact, he thinks we are too easy on them.
If they are going to open the doors of our civilian justice system to these animals, we are better off shutting GITMO down. There would be no benefit of holding captured terrorists there. Secret prisons are the way to go, as long as CIA leakers and the New York Times allow us to use them.
In January 2004, he refused to give a lecture in the United States because under the US-VISIT he would have been required to give up his biometric information, which he believed stripped him to a state of "bare life" (zoe) and was akin to the tattooing that the Nazis did during World War IIGet the idea?
How far do you think I would get if I try that line at the DMV the next time I need to renew my drivers license?
Mistreated in GITMO?
They eat better than anyone buying school lunches!
Hmmmm...Stevens,Breyer,Soutter,Ginsburg.....
IMHO, Kennedy probably joined them to restore his moderate bona fides after his other votes this week.
Best they just shoot them and be done with it.
I guess this means the GITMO detainees will be free to promote their brand of radical Islamic terror to receptive American prisoners. Will they also get the kid glove treatment they got in GITMO or will they have to share common food and facilities like everyone else?
Can I guess how the confirmed four liberal international socialist “judges” voted/will vote on this one?
Can we claim “judicial nullification” on these cases where the politics of the judge prejudices any reason?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.