RSS
Home
Supreme Court Sanity
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court has ruled correctly that detainees held at Guantanamo Bay "have the right to appeal to U.S. civilian courts to challenge their indefinite imprisonment without charges."
Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the 5-4 high court majority, acknowledged the terrorism threat the U.S. faces — the administration's justification for the detentions — but he declared, "The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times."
There once was a time when "conservatives" could be counted on to defend the Constitution. But with dissents by Thomas, Scalia, Alito, and Roberts, not so much anymore, apparently.
As is well known, President Bush and the Pentagon, aided and abetted by a deferential and compliant Congress, chose to place uncharged detainees in Gitmo precisely to end-run the Constitution. But the problem is, these are suspected terrorists we're talking about here, about half of whom haven't even been accused of hostile acts. In fact, according to a report released in 2006 by Seton Hall law professor Mark Denbeaux and attorney Joshua Denbeaux, only eight percent of these "enemy combatants" were characterized as al Qaeda fighters while 40 percent had no connection with al Qaeda at all.
Interestingly, because this American gulag resides off U.S. soil, the White House argues that the Constitution doesn't apply, therefore apparently justifying human rights abuses of the first order. But even the rights guaranteed by the Constitution are trumped by natural rights -- universal rights inherent to all human beings regardless of residence -- chief among them the right to life and liberty. The reason the United States was once the envy of the world was because its founders acknowledged this simple fact and willingly operated their government within the scope of these very tenets.
Laughably, however, today's U.S. government pompously continues to allege that these wartime detainees can be held without charge, and insists upon conducting its affairs more on par with evil regimes like Stalin's Soviet Union, Mao's China, and Kim's North Korea than with the dignity befitting a country claiming to represent freedom, of all things.
If American police are able to concoct charges allowing them to arrest high school graduates for flipping the bird during a commencement ceremony, I have a hard time believing government officials can't come up with charges justifying the incarceration of people they're trying to pass off as threats to our livelihood. But if they can't, that's your first clue that these detentions are illegal in the first place.
