Supreme Court Blocks Guantanamo Bay War-Crimes Trials (SCOTUS rules against President)

Fox News & AP ^ | June 29, 2006

[pabianice]

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

[B.O. Plenty]

There will be no prisoners??

[ARealMothersSonForever]

and those who are guilty of just fighting against us in a legitimate war (POWs) treat according to the Geneva Conventions

You joined up just to legitimize AQ and infer that we deserved 9-11? NB4ZOT

[processing please hold]

Make sure you send one to Bush as well. He wanted Gitmo closed.

[kenn5]

The majority of Justices may have a point - Congress must authorize military tribunals. Congress should have declared war against terrorist right after 9/11.

[jwalsh07]

Lindsay, as usual, can't see the forest for the trees.

The salient point in the majority holding written by Justice Stevens is that terrorists are entitled to Geneva Convention rights.

Lindsay needs to wake up and smell the damn roses.

[Jameison]

"Lindsey Graham is going to submit legislation that permits the administration to try the jihadists in a military court.
Greta says that military courts provide some protections that civilian courts don't provide."

Worth looking into.
All options should be considered.

[Pox]

But that "example" is assuming that the average person is too ignorant to know when to breathe on their own without the MSM or Government's help. I still do not subscribe to that "belief".

We'll have statements from Reid and Pelosi before the day is out I'm assuming. They will be much more useful on the campaign trail than the generic "example" you've presented, IMO.

[Jrabbit]

It will be interesting to see and hear the dims defending the terrorists.....they do it so well.

[SE Mom]

Let's hope Congress steps up...NOW.

[Big Guy and Rusty 99]

I think the best solution is to dose the combatants with PCP and give them sharp objects.

[Leatherneck_MT]

I can't believe how badly other elements of our government wants to lose this war.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Let's hope Congress steps up...NOW.

We're reduced to relying on Congress? Crap, we're doomed.

[jsk10]

Except Terrorists love their Allah, and Democrats hate all religions.

[IrishRainy]

Give trials to the inmates, figure out which are innocent, and then the ones who are guilty...imprison...those who are guilty of just fighting against us in a legitimate war (POWs) treat according to the Geneva Conventions or similar standars applied by other civilized Western nations.

I think if we did that with the Gitmo detainees, I don't think the Left OR anyone in the world would complain about it.

Wait, maybe you're onto something there. If we treat the terrorists extra special nicely, then the liberals will stop bitching and moaning about Bush.

And then we can all roast marshmallows by the fire and sing kum-bye-yah.

You know, it's just so crazy...it might even work!

\sarc

[mrsmith]

The opinion is on the SCOTUS site now.

[mcvey]

Objectively, I agree with you. But the MSM is going to be pouring indelible ink all over the administration today. What is actually a minor ruling is not going to be depicted that way.

Of course, Bush has already had so much ink poured on him that it will be impossible to get off before he leaves office. When reporters ask me what Bush can do to regain momentum, I tell them "nothing." This doesn't mean that he will get some slight upward bumps. But this is really, really my field of expertise and once a story line about a president gets established, there is just nothing you can do about it. Sorry.

My politically-interested students watch Jon Stewart regularly--can you imagine what he is going to be like this evening?

McVey

[Velveeta]

Thank you for the link.

[Txsleuth]

Well, considering EVERYONE has been begging for Gitmo to be closed...

If we can't try them, but CAN hold them for the duration, then where do we keep them??

jeez louise...I hope Tony is telling Bush to come out HARD and promise Americans that HE will not let terrorists go anywhere.

AND, if the dems come out cheering this..and calling it a big LOSS by Bush----that the RNC uses that to let Americans know that the DEMS prefer the freedom of the terrorists, over the safety of Americans at home, and our troops overseas.

[Ready4Freddy]

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

[IMRight]

So under what form will they be tried? In U.S. Courts? That's a different way to handle a war.

Individuals covered by Geneva may be tried in civil courts if the crime they are accused of is not a "war crime", but a violation of civil laws. They may also be tried in whatever fashion members of the detaining military's soldiers would be tried... which means a court martial.