Replies

Firstly, every case is different. There are significant differences between the Hamdi and Padilla cases, for example. Note that my previous posts were not aimed specifically at the Hamdi case. The evidence in the public record that backs the charge that Hamdi is an enemy combatant is far stronger than it it is in the Padilla case.

Secondly, I care nothing for either Padilla or Hamdi. Both are probably very guilty, evil men, who would no doubt spend far less time worrying about my rights, than I do about theirs. On the other hand, the actual degree of guilt, or quality of character, of either of these individuals is not the issue that concerns me. Principles and precedents are the strategic issues here.

You may be perfectly happy with a situation where the government can indefinitely detain without trial anyone it designates as an "enemy combatant," provided it can provide a court with "some evidence" to back that allegation. I am not.