/b

Twitter Updates

What People Say:
"I never thought I'd read the phrase Crazy Politico's Rantings in the NYT. I'll bet they never thought they'd print anything like that phrase either." TLB

Blogroll Me!

My Blog Rolls

American Flag Bloggers

American Flags

Thursday, June 29, 2006

What Does It Mean?

As anyone not under a rock all day knows by now, the Supreme Court ruled 5-3 (Roberts abstaining) that President Bush overstepped his bounds by authorizing military tribunal trials, as used after WWII, for terror suspect Salim Ahmed Hamdan.

Contrary to what some folks on the web, and in print, are saying, the idea of military trials is not out the window. The court didn't rule the idea of such a trial unconstitutional, only the method in which the President decided up them, and the type.

In fact, in his concurrance, Breyer wrote:

"Indeed, Congress has denied the president the legislative authority to create military commissions of the kind at issue here. Nothing prevents the president from returning to Congress to seek the authority he believes necessary."

In other words, unless Congress specifically authorizes it, it's not within presidential powers. However, reading that also shows clearly that the idea of the tribunals themselves are not unconstitutional.

Since the decisions also have nothing to do with the legality of keeping Guantanamo open, it won't be closing anytime soon. My guess is over the next couple of months congress will authorize some sort of military style trial that the Court agrees with.

Technorati Tags: , , ,

4Comments:

Blogger Ted said...

The way I see it, if we can't try criminals which have committed war crimes against our military and our nation, then why are we putting on trial our own fighting men and women for "war crimes"? Any President should have the power to try those people.

Trying even one of our military personnel for murder during a war is like issuing speeding tickets at the Daytona 500. How stupid is that?

And some people wonder why I hate liberals.

9:28 PM  
Blogger Crazy Politico said...

I guess one of the things I still can't figure out is how the Commander in Chief of the military doesn't have the authority to tell the military how to do certain things.

4:26 AM  
Blogger Lone Pony said...

Thanks for explaining that Bob. I also thought military trials had been ruled out.

2:47 PM  
Blogger ablur said...

I keep hearing that this is a huge blow to the Bush administration. This is a minor ruling. All they need to do is ask the congress and get the thing granted. Congress is held by republicans and several Democrats don't want another case like the carnival that included the 20th hi-jacker. This is a momentary pause in the action not the major defeat portrayed in the media.

3:53 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home