US Supreme Court to hear Detainees: POW or not?

[Michele 1]

I thought this would be interesting...it just came over the news, and is something rather incisive...

MSN Story here

And for those blocked...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Justices to hear Guantanamo appeals
Should detainees in Afghan war have access to U.S. courts?

ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 — The Supreme Court will hear its first cases arising from the government’s anti-terrorism campaign following the Sept. 11 attacks, agreeing Monday to consider whether foreigners held at a U.S. Navy base in Cuba should have access to American courts.

THE APPEALS came from British, Australian and Kuwaiti citizens held with more than 600 others suspected of being Taliban or al-Qaida foot soldiers. The court combined the appeals and will hear the consolidated case sometime next year.

Lower courts had found that the American civilian court system did not have authority to hear the men’s complaints about their treatment.

“The United States has created a prison on Guantanamo Bay that operates entirely outside the law,” lawyers for British and Australian detainees argued in asking the high court to take the case.

“Within the walls of this prison, foreign nationals may be held indefinitely, without charges or evidence of wrongdoing, without access to family, friends or legal counsel, and with no opportunity to establish their innocence,” they maintained.

The men whose names are on that case do not even know about the lawsuit, lawyers from the New York-based Center for Constitutional Rights told the court. The lawsuit brought on their behalf claims they are not al-Qaida members and had no involvement in the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

FOREIGN BASE IS KEY

The Bush administration replied that a lower federal appeals court properly looked to a Supreme Court case arising from World War II to determine that foreigners held outside the United States cannot bring the kind of court challenge at issue now. The 1950 case said German prisoners detained by the United States in China had no right to access to federal courts.

The Guantanamo base is a 45-square-mile area on the southeastern tip of Cuba. The land was seized by the United States in the Spanish-American War and has been leased from Cuba for the past century. The lease far predates the communist rule of Fidel Castro.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia had rejected the detainees’ claim that Guantanamo Bay is under the de facto control of the United States, even though it remains a part of Cuba.

Solicitor General Theodore Olson, whose wife was killed aboard the plane that crashed into the Pentagon on Sept. 11, told the court that the prisoners’ lawsuit has great “potential for interference with the core war powers of the president.”

MANY HELD NEARLY TWO YEARS
President Bush has recommended that six of the Guantanamo detainees, including Australian David Hicks, be the first to face military tribunals established for the global war on terror.

Hicks also is among the inmates named in the appeals. He was captured while allegedly fighting with the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Many of the inmates have spent nearly two years in confinement. A group of prominent former judges and diplomats had asked the high court to hear the men’s case. Former prisoners of war also asked that the case be heard, as did Fred Korematsu, whose name is on a Supreme Court case that upheld U.S. detention of Japanese Americans during World War II.

The cases are Rasul v. Bush, 03-334 and Al Odah v. United States, 03-343.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I wonder what the decision will be?

Ciels-
Michele

~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~

[turtlespeed 226]

First - I'm glad you are feeling better. Second - I hope that they do get thier day in court. I would like to see them stand trial in front of a Military Tribunal. I would also Like to see UN representatives there.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Nightingale 0]

Bush needs to figure out how the heck he wants to classify these folks...

either they are

1. civilian prisoners of the US, which gives them access to the US civilian court system

2. military prisoners of war, therefore under the protection of the Geneva convention.

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/lawofwar/geneva02.htm

right now, these men are legal non-entities, which is wrong. The full constitutional due process protections apply on U.S. territory to citizens and legal residents or visitors, provided they did not gain legal entry by fraud. That does not mean such foreigners don't have full rights of life, liberty, and property, but due process may be truncated, provided authority for doing so is conferred by Congress, by either a declaration of war or letters of marque and reprisal. That authority is needed for such actions as trial of prisoners by a military tribunal, or putting bounties on the heads of suspects. In the absence of such authority, only defensive actions may be taken, without violating the law, represented by 18 USC 2441, which applies to everyone involved, including the president. [source: www.constitution.org]

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

Bush needs to figure out how the heck he wants to classify these folks...

and the hearing is for what, exactly?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[lawrocket 3]

I am a little perturbed about that 1950 case. Again, it was an example of a nation at panic about some over-reaching enemy.

This may sound odd, but I fully expect to see Scalia and Thomas siding with Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer, Kennedy and Stevens. I can't say what Rehquist will do, nor O'Connor.

I think that majority I named will decide that due process is being violated. Then they will splinter as to the proper mechanism for their trial, either in federal court or military tribunal.

In short, they'll agree that what is going on is wrong, but will differ in the remedy, much like th eBush/Gore decision.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[narcimund 0]

Quote

Bush needs to figure out how the heck he wants to classify these folks...

Bush HAS figured out how he wants to classify them: As legally unprotected playthings of a tyranny. Unfortunately for him, even his pet supreme court is starting to turn away.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[TheAnvil 0]

Pet supreme court? I hope you meant that in jest, or didn't you read about their recent decision on the institutionalized racial discrimination case from Michigan?

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[BBKid 0]

Quote

Bush needs to figure out how the heck he wants to classify these folks...

He fucked up majorly when, as commander-in-chief of his nation's armed forces, he said something very similar to "I do know this, they're bad people".

Way to go, dickhead - nice open mind there. The fact that it's been proved that some Afghans accused others of being al Q'aida/Taliban so they would be arrested and taken away, only for their accusers to take over their homes and businesses didn't occur to him. No, all those "bad people" with their funny names and long beards wouldn't be that naughty.

Sorry, but Bush is a wanker. I'll be ducking and covering if anyone wants me.

P.S. Sorry it's off-topic Michele - and I'm glad to see you're getting better!

Nick
---------------------------
"I've pierced my foot on a spike!!!"

[mikkey 0]

Quote

The fact that it's been proved that some Afghans accused others of being al Q'aida/Taliban so they would be arrested and taken away, only for their accusers to take over their homes and businesses didn't occur to him.

I just wonder what Americans would say if some US citizen had been detained this way for 2 years by the Chinese....... I just wonder.
And yes, it has already been proven that at least some of the prisoners are innocent, i.e, a bunch of them was sent home after up to 18 month of this "treatment". No compensation or apology forthcoming....

---------------------------------------------------------
When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

[Nightingale 0]

does anyone else see any similarities between this situation and the Japanese camps of WWII??

[PhillyKev 0]

a little, in that both were illegal. But the Japanese situation, IMO was far worse. We took American citizens, not even accused of doing anything wrong and locked them up just in case. At least this time we're making claims that they were enemy combatants.

[BBKid 0]

The Japanese don't deny their torture, and they have expressed "regret" although they haven't apologised.

All Japanese prisoners were bona fide POW's too. No excuse, just a point.

Nick
---------------------------
"I've pierced my foot on a spike!!!"

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

The Japanese don't deny their torture, and they have expressed "regret" although they haven't apologised.

All Japanese prisoners were bona fide POW's too. No excuse, just a point.

I think he was referring to the internment of Japanese-Americans to make sure they weren't traitors.

[BBKid 0]

Yeah, I realised I'd dropped a bollock, but you beat me to it before I could delete the post.

Nick
---------------------------
"I've pierced my foot on a spike!!!"

[Nightingale 0]

Quote

Quote

I think he was referring to the internment of Japanese-Americans to make sure they weren't traitors.

yes, that's what SHE was referring to.

• Quote