just as i predicted in the n.y,t,`s thread...
WASHINGTON - ""The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that President Bush overstepped his authority in ordering military war crimes trials for Guantanamo Bay detainees.
The ruling, a strong rebuke to the administration and its aggressive anti-terror policies, was written by Justice John Paul Stevens, who said the proposed trials were illegal under U.S. law and international Geneva conventions.
The case focused on Salim Ahmed Hamdan, a Yemeni who worked as a bodyguard and driver for Osama bin Laden. Hamdan, 36, has spent four years in the U.S. prison in Cuba. He faces a single count of conspiring against U.S. citizens from 1996 to November 2001.
The ruling raises major questions about the legal status of about 450 men still being held at Guantanamo and exactly how, when and where the administration might pursue the charges against them.
It also seems likely to further fuel international criticism of the administration, including by many U.S. allies, for its handling of the terror war detainees at Guantanamo in Cuba, Abu Ghraib in Iraq and elsewhere.""
as i understand it,the supreme court decision appears to claim that if these individuals are to be tried, they must be tried in federal courts with "geneva convention" protections....
but,strangely, the scotus decision also appears to state that these individuals don't have to be tried at all.....??....they can apparently be detained indefinitely...
maybe i`m wrong,but,i`m getting that the liberal justices have just ruled that the protections of the geneva conventions do, in fact, apply to those the text of the documents specifically exclude: illegal combatants.....
i'm boggled....
WASHINGTON - ""The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that President Bush overstepped his authority in ordering military war crimes trials for Guantanamo Bay detainees.
The ruling, a strong rebuke to the administration and its aggressive anti-terror policies, was written by Justice John Paul Stevens, who said the proposed trials were illegal under U.S. law and international Geneva conventions.
The case focused on Salim Ahmed Hamdan, a Yemeni who worked as a bodyguard and driver for Osama bin Laden. Hamdan, 36, has spent four years in the U.S. prison in Cuba. He faces a single count of conspiring against U.S. citizens from 1996 to November 2001.
The ruling raises major questions about the legal status of about 450 men still being held at Guantanamo and exactly how, when and where the administration might pursue the charges against them.
It also seems likely to further fuel international criticism of the administration, including by many U.S. allies, for its handling of the terror war detainees at Guantanamo in Cuba, Abu Ghraib in Iraq and elsewhere.""
as i understand it,the supreme court decision appears to claim that if these individuals are to be tried, they must be tried in federal courts with "geneva convention" protections....
but,strangely, the scotus decision also appears to state that these individuals don't have to be tried at all.....??....they can apparently be detained indefinitely...
maybe i`m wrong,but,i`m getting that the liberal justices have just ruled that the protections of the geneva conventions do, in fact, apply to those the text of the documents specifically exclude: illegal combatants.....
i'm boggled....
