Skip to comments.
Supreme Court Blocks Guantanamo Bay War-Crimes Trials (SCOTUS rules against President)
Fox News & AP ^
| June 29, 2006
Posted on 06/29/2006 7:11:53 AM PDT by pabianice
Edited on 06/29/2006 7:41:43 AM PDT by Admin Moderator.
[history]
Breaking...
Update:
WASHINGTON The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that President Bush overstepped his authority in ordering military war crimes trials for Guantanamo Bay detainees, a rebuke to the administration and its aggressive anti-terror policies.
Justice John Paul Stevens wrote the opinion, which said the proposed trials were illegal under U.S. law and Geneva conventions.
The case focused on Salim Ahmed Hamdan, a Yemeni who worked as a body guard and driver for Usama bin Laden. Hamdan, 36, has spent four years in the U.S. prison at Guantanamo...
Excerpt. Read more at: Fox News
TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: bush; chiefjustice; clubgitmo; congress; constitution; cotus; detainees; dta; georgewbush; gitmo; guantanamo; guantanamobay; gwot; hamdan; judicialanarchy; judicialreview; judicialreviewsux; judiciary; president; presidentbush; ruling; scotus; supremecourt; usconstitution; waronterror; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300, 301-320, 321-340 ... 881-895 next last
To: Mo1
Which will be interesting to see the Dems defend and fight for the rights of terroristsGood point.
301
posted on
06/29/2006 7:56:01 AM PDT
by
Bahbah
(Democrat Motto: Why not the worst)
To: tioga
Remember them misreading the SCOTUS ruling the sent the Gore recount back to the FSC? They thought their guy won, at first, on the steps out front.
To: Ron in Acreage
What an outrage. Big win for democrats.
Just the otherday I thought they were on a good "streak"...well that didn't last long.
To: DAC21
"This deals a crushing blow to the Nov 2008 mid-terms"
Over reaction alert!
Mark you calendar to come and recheck this thread and we shall see. Hopefully we have Bin Laden in a cave somewhere to reveal on Oct '06.
304
posted on
06/29/2006 7:56:26 AM PDT
by
Tulsa Ramjet
("If not now, when?")
To: LS
Yep. Congress will do just that.
305
posted on
06/29/2006 7:56:28 AM PDT
by
Pukin Dog
(Dont be a Conservopussy! Defend Ann Coulter, you weenies!)
To: jwalsh07
"Well there you have it folks, Justice Stevens has determined that Al Qaeda is a signatoree of the Geneva Conventions."
Good news is, he may not be staying on for that much longer on the SCOTUS.
Same with Ginzburg.
Both are ailing badly.
To: SE Mom
He is absolutely right. Of course I have a bias toward Army guys. :-}
To: gov_bean_ counter
Let us now sit back and watch the Dems turn this into another Wellstone moment.
Perfect.....only the lunatic rat base will like this ruling..the average American is going to be appalled...
308
posted on
06/29/2006 7:56:38 AM PDT
by
mystery-ak
(Army Wife and Army Mother.....toughest job in the military)
To: All
Why is everyone on here freaking out? Please don't tell me that you all are surprised??? On our best day, we have 4 solid votes on the Court. This should come as no shock.
But this decision should motivate us to make sure & elect a conservative in 2008. One more nominee will make all the difference in the world (literally). John Paul cannot hang on until 2012 and Ruth Bader probably can't either. 2008 is crucial.
Besides, this decision should be the GOP's rallying cry in 06 & 08. This decision (if the Repubs play their cards right) will probably help us more than hurt us in the long run.
309
posted on
06/29/2006 7:56:40 AM PDT
by
RebekahT
("Our government is not the solution to the problem, government is the problem." -- Ronald Reagan)
To: IMRight
Did the court actually rule that the Geneva Convention applied to terrorist?
310
posted on
06/29/2006 7:57:01 AM PDT
by
Perdogg
To: jwalsh07
Well there you have it folks, Justice Stevens has determined that Al Qaeda is a signatoree of the Geneva Conventions. So Congress would have a reason to officially declare war on Al-q now ???
311
posted on
06/29/2006 7:57:15 AM PDT
by
Mo1
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePb6H-j51xE&search=Democrats)
To: CatoRenasci
The Supreme Court's idea of Americans who were "in all circumstances ... treated humanely"
312
posted on
06/29/2006 7:57:22 AM PDT
by
Diogenesis
(Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum)
To: snowrip
I'll say it again: They have ruled that the detainees can't be held because they aren't prisoners of war, but they're suggesting Bush can be prosecuted for violating the GC, which only applies to prisoners of war. This is exactly what I get out of it. Seems incredibly stupid to make both arguments.
susie
313
posted on
06/29/2006 7:57:30 AM PDT
by
brytlea
(amnesty--an act of clemency by an authority by which pardon is granted esp. to a group of individual)
To: Mo1
Or Congress steps in and passes a law concerning this...True.
Even if the law doesn't pass, I think the debate should be dispositive for the November elections.
314
posted on
06/29/2006 7:58:06 AM PDT
by
Petronski
(I just love that woman.)
To: SE Mom
A very good point. I didn't see that at first glance. That extends the Geneva Convention in ways that will have unintended consequences.
McVey
315
posted on
06/29/2006 7:58:22 AM PDT
by
mcvey
(Fight on. Do not give up. Ally with those you must. Defeat those you can. And fight on whatever.)
To: mcvey
Ried v. Covert was after the Bricker amendment failed.
There is no question that this was Stevens' FU to the Bush administration, Souter's FU to the people who don't like Kelo, and Ruthie's FU to America on general principles.
316
posted on
06/29/2006 7:58:30 AM PDT
by
CatoRenasci
(Ceterum Censeo Arabiam Esse Delendam -- Forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit)
To: Petronski
What law can they pass to fix this?
317
posted on
06/29/2006 7:58:44 AM PDT
by
Jrabbit
(Scuse me??)
To: pabianice
Well, hell, let's just set 'em free. There's a big ocean nearby - anybody who can swim to the Middle East can consider himself a free man.
To: Pukin Dog
Re-reading this: apparently we can't "try" them, but I don't see anything in there saying we can't "hold" them until Keith Olbermann gets an audience or Helen Thomas dies.
319
posted on
06/29/2006 7:59:23 AM PDT
by
LS
To: Peach
What's the uniform of the jihadists -- a suicide vest?
Along with a woman or child as their sheild.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300, 301-320, 321-340 ... 881-895 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson