Comments on: Detainee Law Is Under Supreme Court Microscope

By: M.A.

M.A. — Wed, 29 Mar 2006 14:14:55 +0000

Yeah, Roberts is a reliable vote for the government on this issue — he ruled for the government in this case already on a lower court, which is why he is not hearing the SCOTUS appeal.

I wish the media had actually bothered, in the Roberts and Alito hearings, to talk a bit more about issues like these. The SCOTUS now has a block of four justices who basically believe in letting the President do whatever he wants, sometimes referred to as the RATS groups (Roberts Alito Thomas Scalia). Yet the media didn’t seem to think this was important compared to headlines about “Roberts says he’ll respect precedent.”

By: AustinRoth

AustinRoth — Wed, 29 Mar 2006 14:10:53 +0000

What are you trying to say about Roberts? He recused himself from this hearing, and was not involved. So what tea laeves are you reading?

By: Fitzov

Fitzov — Wed, 29 Mar 2006 14:04:49 +0000

The habeas corpus issue is really the easiest part of the case to consider. Of the scotus writers that I’ve read, it seems unlikely that the court is going to rule that it does not have jurisdiction.

The tough issue, and the issue most likely to result in a split and victory for Rumsfeld, is the issue of whether the President in times of war may alter the military commisions (tribunals) procedure in such a way so as to circumvent basic protections under UCMJ.