Forget all the debates about what fascism is and whether it's coming under Bush. We are back to the Dred Scott decision, only substituting "terrorist suspect" for "Black man." Roberts et al may quibble that they are only saying "the question is moot" because Padilla was no longer in military custody as an "enemy combatant," but you can bet Bush will take this as carte blanche to use these powers again.
Court backs Bush over US terror suspects By Patti Waldmeir in Washington Published: April 3 2006 18:22 | Last updated: April 3 2006 18:22 Jose Padilla The Bush administration won a significant legal victory in the war on terror on Monday when the US Supreme Court refused to question the governments power to hold US citizens indefinitely as enemy combatants, even those captured on US soil. The justices voted 6-3 not to review the case of Jose Padilla, one of the most high-profile cases testing the administrations anti-terrorism powers in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. Mr Padilla, a US citizen captured in Chicago, was held in military detention without charges for three years before the government decided to try him in the civilian court system. The shift to try Mr Padilla as a civilian was widely criticised as an attempt by the administration to avoid a Supreme Court review of the case, and the tactic appears to have worked. Three justices who held the balance of power in the case Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Anthony Kennedy and Justice John Paul Stevens took the unusual step of issuing an opinion to justify their refusal to hear the case, focusing on the fact that Mr Padilla is no longer being held as an enemy combatant. Any consideration of what rights he might be able to assert if he were returned to military custody would be hypothetical, and to no effect, at this stage of the proceedings, Justice Kennedy wrote for the three men, noting that civilian custody was part of the relief he sought, and that its lawfulness is uncontested. Its a shame that the Supreme Court didnt use this opportunity to address the claim of the United States that it can pick up anybody on US soil in connection with the war on terror, said Jennifer Daskal, director of advocacy for Human Rights Watch. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, one of three justices who voted to hear the case, said Mr Padilla risked being transferred back into military custody at the end of his civilian trial. Justice Kennedy acknowledged that Mr Padilla has a continuing concern that he might be reclassified as an enemy combatant but said that concern can be addressed if the necessity arises. But he also issued a veiled warning to the government not to return Mr Padilla to the military, and invited him to bring his appeal straight back to the Supreme Court if they did so. At the moment, no US citizens are being held as enemy combatants. The case appears to have been an extraordinarily difficult one for the justices, who discussed it at eight separate private meetings before Mondays ruling. The decision highlights the central role that Justice Kennedy, a moderate conservative, is likely to play when the court rules on another terrorism case that tests the constitutionality of the military tribunals set up to try detainees. A ruling in that case, which involves the detention of Salim Hamdan, Osama bin Ladens former driver, is expected by June or July. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Subscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Digest: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
