Posted on 03/17/2009 3:52:09 AM PDT by Sergeant Tim
At first you may think, “That sounds reasonable. After all, who can really predict the future?” But then read DOJ’s next sentence: “This position is limited to the authority upon which the Government is relying to detain the persons now being held at Guantanamo Bay.” Turns out it’s not about the future at all. It’s about the people about whom we’ve had the better part of eight years to develop a position on what “substantial” assistance is and which “associated forces” are eligible for indefinite detention.
Obama doesn’t want to say he is relying on Article II — even though DOJ’s new guidance derives prominent support from Ex Parte Quirin, the World War II case in which, as the Bush administration frequently observed, the Supreme Court upheld FDR’s unilateral authority to detain, try by military commission, and execute enemy combatants — including U.S. citizens — who were captured far from any combat zone. But when it comes to explaining whom he might detain, Obama is reserving to himself the right to make it up as he goes along. Not because Article II says so, but because he says so.
Meanwhile, on the detention of non-state actors under international law, much of what Holder’s DOJ says could have been written — indeed, was at times written — by the Bush administration. This includes a remarkable footnote which explains that courts are required to “defer to the President’s judgment” regarding what privileges alien terrorists (“irregular forces”) enjoy under international law. In addition, the Obama administration now asserts that terrorists really do fall into that “legal black hole” Obama and Holder’s old friends in the Gitmo bar have been railing about for years: They are not entitled to the Geneva Convention protections for either prisoners-of-war or civilians.
(Excerpt) Read more at article.nationalreview.com ...
Ping!
hmmmmm - It seems we got the term “enemy combatants” by dancing around the term “prisoner of war” -
A distinction without a difference.
Dislikable Irritants
Non-Allied Irksomers
Antagonistic Veximers
Hostile Tantrumeers
Badgersome Bandoleers
Non-Festivus Foes
Knights Who Say ‘Nee’
Foilsome Antagonists
Nemesistic Fightbrostisers
Obama-lini’s new term for “enemy combatants”: Tovarish!
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.