The Road to Hell
 

Terror Detainees Win Right to U.S. Courts

2 minutes ago


By ANNE GEARAN, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court delivered a mixed verdict Monday on the Bush administration's anti-terrorism policies, ruling that the U.S. government has the power to hold American citizens and foreign nationals without charges or trial, but that detainees can challenge their treatment in U.S. courts.



The administration had sought a more clear-cut endorsement of its policies than it got. The White House had claimed broad authority to seize and hold potential terrorists or their protectors for as long as the president saw fit ? and without interference from judges or lawyers.

---------------------------------------------

There is no longer Habeus Corpus in the U.S. Time for me to move away. I am so thankful I was born a citizen of several countries. I am free to leave.

Update

Terror Detainees Win Right to U.S. Courts

3 minutes ago

Add Top Stories - AP to My Yahoo!

By ANNE GEARAN, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court delivered a mixed verdict Monday on the Bush administration's anti-terrorism policies, ruling that the U.S. government has the power to hold American citizens and foreign nationals without charges or trial, but that detainees can challenge their treatment in U.S. courts.



The administration had sought a more clear-cut endorsement of its policies than it got. The White House had claimed broad authority to seize and hold potential terrorists or their protectors for as long as the president saw fit - and without interference from judges or lawyers.

In both cases, the ruling was 6-3, although the lineup of justices was different in the two decisions.

Ruling in the case of American-born detainee Yaser Esam Hamdi, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor (news - web sites) said the court has "made clear that a state of war is not a blank check for the president when it comes to the rights of the nation's citizens."

Congress did give the president authority to hold Hamdi, a four-justice plurality of the court said, but that does not cancel out the basic right to a day in court.

The court ruled similarly in the case of about 600 foreign-born men held indefinitely at a U.S. Navy (news - web sites) prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The men can use American courts to contest their captivity and treatment, the high court said.

The Supreme Court sidestepped a third major terrorism case, ruling that a lawsuit filed on behalf of detainee Jose Padilla improperly named Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld instead of the much lower-level military officer in charge of the Navy brig in South Carolina where Padilla has been held for more than two years.

Padilla must refile a lawsuit challenging his detention in a lower court.

------------------------------------------------

The Padilla case which is one of the most important cases to come across the Supreme in years was sidestepped, am obvious sign of cowardess by the high court.

We officially live in a dictatorship. What a frightful parallel to the Senate giving Julius Caesar dictatorial powers.

You are no longer innocent before proven guilty. You know have to prove your innocence simply to get a court date.

Just review the decision on FindLaw. It seems that the situation is better than reported by Yahoo.

Hamdi and Gitmo cases do allow for lawsuits in U.S. courts. The Court has struck down Bush policy of illegal detainment what they haven't done is set down an actual method or process of appeal which they left for the lower courts.

It looks like the Padilla case will be moved to a South Carolina court since he is being held without any rights by the military (he had original been held by the FBI which is why his lawyers sued AssClown). His process starts all over again.