THE ISSUE: Supreme Court ruling on detainees

OUR OPINION: Civilian courts not the place for detainees, but Court right not to allow indefinite detention without judicial process

The ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court involving U.S. detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, was the only decision the court could make in upholding the rule of law that guarantees the legal rights of Americans.

While the detainees – they are also called enemy combatants – are not U.S. citizens, the nation’s highest court deciding that is OK to indefinitely imprison someone without due process would have been but a step away from U.S. citizens potentially being treated the same.

Writes Sheldon Richman, senior fellow at The Future of Freedom Foundation and editor of The Freeman magazine: “In a too-close-for-comfort 5-4 ruling, the court reminded the American people — indeed, the world — that arbitrary power destroys individual liberty. Where government can lock people up and throw away the key — answerable to no one at all — there liberty does not dwell.

That is what the Bush administration has aspired to, but last week the court drew a line.”

More specifically, the court decided that the Military Commissions Act of 2006 that forbade any court from considering a writ of habeas corpus for “an alien detained by the United States” as enemy combatant did not satisfy the clause that allows Congress to constitutionally suspend habeas corpus.

The case will not mean release of the detainees. Each case must be heard individually, which will put it in the hands of civilian judges to determine which individuals are a threat to the nation.

Legal experts such as South Carolina U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, a former military prosecutor, says that is a problem.

“The court ruling establishes a dangerous precedent for our country by conferring upon non-citizen enemy combatants the same rights as American citizens in a criminal proceeding. They ignore the fact these combatants are warriors, not common criminals. It is why I continue to believe the legal rights of enemy combatants should be governed by the law of war, not domestic criminal law.”

“The court’s ruling makes clear the legal rights given to al-Qaeda members today should exceed those provided to the Nazis during World War II. Our nation is at war. It’s truly unfortunate the Supreme Court did not recognize and appreciate that fact,” Graham said.

The problem is these combatants are not warriors for any sovereign nation. They are not prisoners of war under international law. Their status is legally closer to that of criminals.

There should be a military method short of U.S. civilian courts to determine the outcome of cases involving the detainees. But the highest court in the land has made it clear that detainees will not be dealt with outside the law. It is now back in the hands of the president and Congress to determine how the detainees can be fairly treated according to legal ideals upon which this nation was founded, has fought wars and will go forward.

You must be logged in to comment.