GITMO ruling stops torture, but no one's released-& 3 USSC Judges are evil

[papau]

No one is released - they just become enemy combatants gain with no trial date and held without charges forever because this "war" can never end in a peace agreement - just like the war on Drugs can not end in a peace agreement because it is not a war - they are both police actions.

Meanwhile 3 USSC Judges are willing to toss the Constitution so as to toss out Treaties not liked by the current President despite the fact that we have signed them - like Geneva, and they have no problem with the establishment of a new Judicial System designed solely by the President for a select group of people - again with those in the "given group" defined solely by the President without Court review as to whether or not they are even in the defined group.

At leasr we know what Oren Hatch and the rest of the GOP mean when they say they want to "defend" the Consitution. It appears all GOP patriotic/political statements really only mean tax cuts for the rich and corporate, and the removal of any and all laws that might slow the acquistion of more wealth by the obsenely wealthy.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060629/pl_nm/security_guantanamo_court_dc_3

Supreme Court rejects Guantanamo military tribunals
By James Vicini
23 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - In a major blow for President George W. Bush's war on terrorism, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that the military tribunal system set up to try Guantanamo prisoners violates the Geneva Conventions and U.S. military rules.

Snip...

That part of the decision was a stinging blow for the administration in a case brought by Hamdan, who was Osama bin Laden's driver in Afghanistan. Hamdan, one of more than 400 foreign terrorism suspects at the U.S. military base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, was captured in November 2001.

At the White House, spokesman Tony Snow said, "We have no comment until we have read the decision but we will once we have read the decision."

Snip...

The opinion by Stevens was joined by the other liberal justices David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer, and moderate-conservative Anthony Kennedy.

The conservatives -- Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito -- dissented.

The ruling involved eight of the nine court members. Chief Justice John Roberts, who was appointed by Bush, removed himself because he previously was on the U.S. appeals court panel that ruled for the Bush administration in Hamdan's case. <snip>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/29/AR2006062900928.html

Supreme Court Rejects Guantanamo War Crimes Trials

By William Branigin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, June 29, 2006; 10:44 AM

The Supreme Court today delivered a stunning rebuke to the Bush administration over its plans to try Guantanamo detainees before military commissions, ruling that the commissions are unconstitutional.

In a 5-3 decision, the court said the trials were not authorized under U.S. law or the Geneva Conventions. Justice John Paul Stevens wrote the opinion in the case, called Hamdan v. Rumsfeld. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. recused himself from the case.

The ruling, which overturned a federal appeals court decision in which Roberts had participated, represented a defeat for President Bush, who had ordered military trials for detainees at the Guantanamo Bay naval base. About 450 detainees captured in the war on terrorism are currently held at the U.S. naval base in Cuba.

<snip>

The case raised core constitutional principles of separation of powers as well as fundamental issues of individual rights.

<snip>

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/WBT005616.htm

Bush: will take Guantanamo court ruling seriously

WASHINGTON, June 29 (Reuters) - President George W. Bush on Thursday said he had not fully reviewed the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that found the current military tribunal system to try Guantanamo prisoners unlawful, but promised it would be taken seriously.

Bush said he would consult with the U.S. Congress to attain appropriate authority for the military tribunals the high court said violated U.S. military rules and the Geneva Conventions.

"We take the findings seriously," he said at a news conference with Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi. "We will work with the Congress" on a way forward.


http://www.scotusblog.com/movabletype/archives/2006/06/hamdan_summary.html

<snip>More importantly, the Court held that Common Article 3 of Geneva aplies as a matter of treaty obligation to the conflict against Al Qaeda. That is the HUGE part of today's ruling. The commissions are the least of it. This basically resolves the debate about interrogation techniques, because Common Article 3 provides that detained persons "shall in all circumstances be treated humanely," and that "o this end," certain specified acts "are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever"—including "cruel treatment and torture," and "outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment." This standard, not limited to the restrictions of the due process clause, is much more restrictive than even the McCain Amendment. See my further discussion here.

This almost certainly means that the CIA's interrogation regime is unlawful, and indeed, that many techniques the Administation has been using, such as waterboarding and hypothermia (and others) violate the War Crimes Act (because violations of Common Article 3 are deemed war crimes). <snip>

[louis-t]

1. * makes it sound like he will "review" something

He's not going to "review" anything. His lawyers will try to find a way around this. He will continue as he has, and then retroactively look for an excuse why he has to act this way.

[n2doc]

2. Count 'em 4

Roberts did not rule because he had ALREADY ruled in Bushco's favor as an Appellate Judge. So there are 4 evil judges, as we already knew.

Wonder if someday if we have a Democratic President (one can only hope) if the evil 4 will be spinning as fast as they can to undo all of the rulings in favor of W. I am sure they will.

[papau]

3. You are correct-4 evil judges willing to toss the Constitution if you call

a police action a "war"

Doesn't matter if there is no one to make "peace" with - if they pick you up, citizen or non-citizen, you stay in jail forever or until a military judge - operating not under the Uniform military code of Justice rules but under whatever rules the current DOD Secretary likes and gets the President to approve - rules you guilty and orders a real, only the GOP know how harsh and how little, if any, evidence required, sentence.