LAT: Legal Battle Over Detainee Bill Is Likely

[DeepModem Mom]

Legal Battle Over Detainee Bill Is Likely
The Senate approves Bush's plan for military tribunals. Limits on terror suspects' options for appeal could lead to a Supreme Court ruling.
By David G. Savage and Richard Simon, Times Staff Writers
September 29, 2006

WASHINGTON — The Senate on Thursday approved President Bush's plan to question and try foreign terrorism suspects before military judges — without oversight by the federal courts.

Bush is expected to receive a bill he can sign into law in the next few days, but legal challenges almost assuredly will be pursued against the prosecution process, which the administration considers a key element in its war on terrorism.

The measure's most disputed provision would block foreign prisoners held by the military from turning to the federal courts to end their imprisonment. By preventing detainees from challenging their confinement in court, it sets up a potential constitutional conflict before the Supreme Court....

***

The Republican-led House and Senate not only gave Bush the legal authority he requested, but told the Supreme Court to stay out of the matter, now and in the future....

***

But some lawmakers, Republicans as well as Democrats, called the move to suspend habeas corpus — the demand for legal justification of one's imprisonment — a historic mistake, and one that could cause the entire bill to be struck down....

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-detain29sep29,0,142943.story?coll=la-home-headlines

[Rose Siding]

1. Those who voted for that bill have not even a basic understanding

of our national character, general history, OR our system of government.

[ThomCat]

3. I think they know our national character and general history

very well. They are just emphasising the portions of it that allow the genocide of Native Americans, Slavery, the imprisonment of Japanese Americans in prison camps, and ongoing bigotry of all kinds.

[wtmusic]

2. Congress "told the Supreme Court to stay out of the matter"???

How, uh, unConstitutional. I think this could be construed as judicial tampering.

[cally]

4. I'm wondering if the final bill was made as bad as possible

so it would be more likely to be struck down in the Supreme Court. It was a common tactic for many of the abortion bills. Make them likely to be struck down in the courts so those in politically vulnerable positions could vote for them in the hopes that they would never become law. I don't like it. I hate the bill but I do wonder if many thought this would be turned over in the Supreme Court.

[aquart]

5. THIS Supreme Court?

I don't really think they can rely on that anymore.

[mom cat]

7. Bush has over two years to further pack SCOTUS with imperialists.

Be very afraid and fight like hell!

[Kolesar]

9. This legislation started when *this* supreme court declared current

...practice was unconstitutional. There is hopes that they would turn this back, too.

[papau]

11. *this* supreme court declared current practice had to be via Congressional

Law - and that not having such a law made such practice "unconstitutional".

The current Court majority has no love of the Bill of Rights beyond making sure those rights cover private property claims of Corporations.

The loss of habeas corpus — the demand for legal justification of one's imprisonment - is just our "Enabling Act". Indeed Hitler's 1933 Enabling Act (Ermächtigungsgesetz - or Gesetz zur Behebung der Not von Volkgiven in German) was a simple grant of legislative powers to the government - meaning Hitler - now meaning the President - Bush. The US version adds to the 1933 concept a provision that tells the Courts they do not have a right to review actions of the President under this law - and indeed can not review this law - period.

Bush and Hitler - Obtaining dictatorial powers using largely legal means...those who said that 9/11 exposed a "failure" of the Bush administration are finally seeing just how successful Bush's pre and post 911 actions have been.

With today's makeup of the USSC, I give destruction of the Constitution at least a 50/50 chance of being approved by the Court.

[Kolesar]

15. That was very well written & insightful.

You ought to put it in your journal for future reference.

[Thickasabrick]

14. Agreed. The court also gave clear guidelines as to what would

be acceptable - all of them were ignored.

[mom cat]

6. Rec #5!

[REACTIVATED IN CT]

8. Yes, there will be legal challenges, but the poor

suckers who are detained will remain in prison for years while the challenges work their way up to SCOTUS. Padilla, was not freed despite recent SCOTUS rulings

If an innocent person is detained and denied habeus, he/she can't get those years of his/her life back

edited to correct statement about Hamdi not being freed

[PATRICK]

10. Now comes the question

Has bush sown up his favors in SCOTUS to an even more abominable extent than in the House to shred Habeas Corpus for Imperial absolutism? All the pieces have been moving into place for one or all of the following: 1) protecting the coup leaders from any of the consequences of their crimes, 2) staffing all the places of power with cronies and anti-democratic corruption 3) paving the way for the next stage in the eternal war for oil and raw power. Number one is essential and not one subject to chance or opportunity. It has to be taken now while there is power to do so. It also is convenient for the irrational repeat march to a new war of aggression against Iran- whose pieces however laughable or disreputable are also well in place. It also serves to wage total war for an insane campaign to rewrite the inevitable historic vote this November.

Nothing much has changed except Bush's inevitable failure is provoking the inevitable Bush response with the inevitable surrender by the weakened institutions and the reeling assault on public sanity. No terror incident, no change in Iraq or in the economy. Nothing but the same old crap with various factions down on their knees praying for a terror strike or electoral victory or some sudden awakening of conscience or some Bush success that actually is real(the least likely scenario).

If nothing changes America will grind itself to political rubble and economic, military and moral ruin while Bush and Cheney keep protecting themselves against reality with the compromises of their victims and the aid of their cronies.

[burrowowl]

12. Hopefully, it will be challenged

and struck down.
However, the fact remains that it was voted for in the first place!
What does this say about America?

[Thickasabrick]

13. It says we need checks and balances - vote for your local

democrat!