A Ruling for Freedom

There has been much coverage about the U. S. Supreme Court's ruling yesterday that struck a major blow against the Chimperator's efforts to suspend the U. S. Constitution and establish something akin to courts of star chamber for "unlawful enemy combatants" so as to circumvent constitutional rules of due process, right to counsel, etc. Such arbitrary and capricious courts and legal proceedings are in direct keeping with the Chimperator's authorization of torture in contravention of the Geneva Conventions (something I believe Bush should literally be put on trial for). Today's New York Times has a great editorial on the Court's decision. Remeber this - McCain has stated numerous times that he would appoint justices like those who dissented from the majority ruling. That should frighten anyone who values civil rights for all citizens. Here are some highlights from the editorial:

*

For years, with the help of compliant Republicans and frightened Democrats in Congress, President Bush has denied the protections of justice, democracy and plain human decency to the hundreds of men that he decided to label “unlawful enemy combatants” and throw into never-ending detention.
*

On Thursday, the court turned back the most recent effort to subvert justice with a stirring defense of habeas corpus, the right of anyone being held by the government to challenge his confinement before a judge. The court ruled that the detainees being held in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, have that cherished right, and that the process for them to challenge their confinement is inadequate. It was a very good day for people who value freedom and abhor Mr. Bush’s attempts to turn Guantánamo Bay into a constitutional-rights-free zone.

*

The right of habeas corpus is so central to the American legal system that it has its own clause in the Constitution: it cannot be suspended except “when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.” Despite this, the Bush administration repeatedly tried to strip away habeas rights. . . . Now, by a 5-to-4 vote, the court has affirmed the detainees’ habeas rights. The majority, in an opinion by Justice Anthony Kennedy, ruled that the Military Commissions Act violates the Suspension Clause, by eliminating habeas corpus although the requirements of the Constitution — invasion or rebellion — do not exist.

*

There is an enormous gulf between the substance and tone of the majority opinion, with its rich appreciation of the liberties that the founders wrote into the Constitution, and the what-is-all-the-fuss-about dissent. It is sobering to think that habeas hangs by a single vote in the Supreme Court of the United States — a reminder that the composition of the court could depend on the outcome of this year’s presidential election. The ruling is a major victory for civil liberties — but a timely reminder of how fragile they are.