Appropriate non-grab

ARTICLE: McCain Denounces Detainee Ruling, By Juliet Eilperin and Michael D. Shear, Washington Post, June 14, 2008; Page A04

ARTICLE: Critics Study Possible Limits to Habeas Corpus Ruling, By Michael Abramowitz, Washington Post, June 14, 2008; Page A05

I believe in this ruling, and see it as an appropriate limit on federal power, but hardly a new "grab."

The new grab had already occurred in the other direction, and now it's being trimmed back.

I wrote in PNM that this would happen and be natural: the Exec pushes new rules to the max and the Court trims back.

Surprised to see McCain side with Bush on this one.

Comments

[C Norwood, Edinburgh]

Why are you surprised, Dr Barnett? Mr McCain has made numerous statements expounding his belief that America's conflict with a small number of capable Islamists is analogous to the converging threats posed in the 30's and 40's by Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia . Obviously the system of checks and balances is expendable for him.

[Keith_Indy]

Abuse of power leads to over restriction, which leads to some other 'crisis of faith' in the government, which leads to loosening some of the restrictions. It's a pendulum that swings back and forth at it's own pace. It's why we have checks and balances in our Federal government.

[stuart abrams]

McCain's denunciation demonstrates the extent to which he has drunk the neocon Kool Aid, and further demonstrates what a dangerous bunch of fanatics the neocons really are. The scope of the decision is extremely narrow. It merely holds that there is a procedural mechanism available, namely habeas corpus as provided in the constitution, to obtain judicial review of the executive branch's determination that a detainee is in fact an "enemy combatant." It does not hold that the military tribunal system is unconstitutional and it makes no determination as to what Due Process rights must be accorded to detainees who are true enemy combatants. Indeed, the decision is careful to note that it would not apply in "normal" war situations (wars of defined scope and duration), so there is no danger of lawyers taking over the battlefields. The decision merely holds that when a person is detained indefinitely in a jurisdiction that is under US control and not in a battlefield situation, habeas corpus is available, as expressly guaranteed in the constitution, to permit the judicial branch to review the legality of the detention. How this can be denounced as one of the "worst decisions in U.S. history" is unfathomable.

[Ted O'Connor]

I spent many years watching people, following people, photgraphing them, listening to their phone calls, searching their homes, siezing their property, arresting them and sending them off to prison. That experience has made me a fanatical guardian of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. I respect John McCain for his service to country, but I am mystified by his thinking on this issue. To hold prisoners on a United States military base, and pretend that therefore it is not American soil? Does this make any US base outside of the States immune to the protections of the Constitution. Can we keep prisoners in limbo in Japan? Korea? Germany? How long before we decide to use bases right here? How about Fort Knox, Kentucky or Paris Island? Germany was a highly civilized country, known for it's advances in medicine, engineering and science. It had literature, music and the arts. Then it had some madmen come to power. The German people stood silent as their neighbors were taken away. We are fortunate to have strong voices raised in protest when our rights are threatened. The men who conceived and wrote the Constitution of the United States are giants. They are responsible for an enourmous change in the way men live. What they gave us must be protected from those tiny and incompetent men who cannot see past the closed door of their own office. I have stood in front of a judge and explained the cause for issuance of warrants. Warrants to search, warrants to arrest. I have been part of the laborious process of obtaining permission to conduct electronic surveillance. Would it have been easier not to? Yes. Do I want to live in a country where it is easy? No, I don't.

[VoteWithTroops.com]

Sorry, Sir, that guy on this battlefield was NOT trying to surrender, he was reaching for something, probably his AK or RPG launcher.

When prisoners are captured by US forces, they will be turned over to our Arab allies, not given US habeas corpus or Miranda rights. Jeez.

Once our enemies realize surrending is not an option, our volunteers will be at greater risk of being killed.

Just another good intention that back fires.

[Curtis Gale Weeks]

McCain really is using the Bush/Rove playbook, "How to Win an American Election: All We Have to Fear is...Too Little Fear!"

I think the horse has been beaten to death, and McCain doesn't see it.