TOP STORY

No Blank Check

By Thomas Jeffrey

---

Article Posted: Friday June 30, 2006

---

The concept of the unitary executive, something that Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito as well as several others in the Bush Administration subscribe to, was essentially rejected Thursday afternoon by the Supreme Court in a 5-3 decision in the case of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld.

Finding that the President of the United States does not have the legal authority to utilize military tribunals to try some 11 suspected terrorists held at Guantanamo Bay, the ruling essentially leaves the Smirking POTUS left with only one avenue afforded to him; take hat-in-hand and lobby the boys and girls on Capitol Hill for just such authority.

Senator Bill Frist, never one to miss an opportunity to wax politically, announced that he will introduce just such a bill following the July 4 recess, stating that “to keep America safe in the war on terror, I believe we should try terrorists only before military commissions, not in our civilian courts.”

Writing for the majority, Justice John Paul Stevens stated that “the military commission at issue is not expressly authorized by any congressional act,” and went on to add that the proposed tribunals “must be understood to incorporate at least the barest of those trial protections that have been recognized by customary international law.”

“In undertaking to try Hamdan and subject him to criminal punishment, the executive [Bush] is bound to comply with the rule of law that prevails.”

The ruling is a blow to the Bush Administration’s assertion that the Smirking POTUS has vested within his office the broad authority to either capture, detain or prosecute suspected terrorists. The Court denied the President that broad interpretation, finding that contrary to the Administration’s beliefs, those that have been defined as “enemy combatants” and are currently being held at Guantanamo Bay are, in fact, entitled to the same rights and privileges afforded to prisoners of war under both the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the Geneva Conventions.

But perhaps more importantly, the Supreme Court found that Congress had not given the President a “blank check” to prosecute his War on Terror.

Authoring a concurring opinion, Justice Stephen Breyer wrote that “indeed, Congress has denied the president the legislative authority to create military commissions of the kind at issue here,” but added that “nothing prevents the president from returning to Congress to seek the authority he believes necessary.”

Dissenting from the opinion were the Administration’s go-to guys on the court, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito, who pulled no punches in voicing their disagreement with the ruling.

Scalia called the court’s reasoning a “mess,” and Thomas wrote that the ruling would “sorely hamper the president’s ability to confront and defeat a new and deadly enemy.”

Chief Justice John Roberts recused himself from the case due to having previously ruled in favor of president’s authority while on the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

The president struck a conciliatory tone when he met with reporters following the ruling later in the day, promising that “to the extent there is latitude to work with the Congress to determine whether or not the military tribunals will be an avenue in which to give people their day in court, we will do so.”

But it’s doesn’t take a legal analyst to come to the conclusion that we may be witnessing the beginning of end for the Bush Administration’s war on terror, whose policies are now being exposed as the legally bankrupt house of cards that they truly are.

And as for the Republicans in Congress, Thursday’s ruling now means that they will have to starting putting put their money where their mouth is—namely authoring legislation that expressly circumvents their own Constitutional authority—which gives both the Democrats on the Hill as well as those who still believe in the concept of separation of powers, the chance to pin these jokers down for the hypocrites that they really are.

This should be fun.

Sources:
High court blocks Gitmo military tribunals – CNN.com
High Court Rejects Detainee Tribunals – Washington Post
A Governing Philosophy Rebuffed – Washington Post

- posted by: Thomas Jeffrey and Jun 30, 01:47 PM in Supreme-Court Bush-Administration

 

Comments

Leave your comment

Name:

E-mail:

Website:

Message: