"How did it come to pass that an opposition's measure of a president's foreign policy was all or nothing, success or "failure"? The answer is that the political absolutism now normal in Washington arrived at the moment--Nov. 7, 2000--that our politics subordinated even a war against terror to seizing the office of the presidency." - Daniel Henninger - WSJ 11/18/05
"the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts." - George Orwell

Tuesday, June 12, 2007

Did the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals Get it Right?

Being no lawyer one has to take it from the experience of those that are or from those with a certain legal knowledge. The first reaction to yesterdays news of the 4th Circuits ruling that Ali Saleh Kalah al-Marri, was here in the U.S. legally so cannot be held as an "unlawful enemy combatant" and must either be set free or tried within the U.S. civilian court system with the rights that any American has; leaves one sickened. And makes you wonder about just who is the Commander in Chief in time of war, a war that fails to fit a war definition that people are comfortable with.

Turning to NRO, you can read the Editors take on the decision and Andrew McCarthys reaction.

The editors at NRO:

"Since al-Marri’s efforts were acts of war rather than mere crimes, President Bush ordered him held as an alien unlawful enemy combatant. But now the Fourth Circuit has substituted the commander-in-chief’s wartime judgment with its own. Two judges — Diana Gribbon Motz, a Clinton appointee, and Roger Gregory, an unsuccessful Clinton appointee renominated by President Bush in a good-will gesture to Democrats — ordered that al-Marri be released or referred to the civilian-justice system for a full-fledged criminal trial."

Andrew McCarthy's take on the sad decision:
"Strike another blow for lawfare: The use of the American people’s courts as a weapon against the American people in a war prosecuted by the president — the only public official elected by all Americans — under an authorization for the use of military force overwhelmingly passed by the American people’s representatives in congress. And all for the benefit of an alien sent here to attack us."
There is also one of my favorite fonts of ignorance; the NY Times editorial boards opinion:
"This ruling is another strong argument for bringing Mr. Bush’s detention camps under the rule of law. Congress can do that by repealing the odious Military Commissions Act of 2006, which endorsed Mr. Bush’s twisted system of indefinite detentions, by closing Guantánamo Bay and by allowing the courts to sort out the prisoners — not according to the whims of one president with an obvious disdain for the balance of powers but by the rules of justice that have guided this nation for more than 200 years."
If someone is here lawfully, but with the intention of committing crimes; crimes that are in keeping with, whether The toilet Paper's understanding of the law, laws of war or unlawful acts of war as practiced by al Qaeda we should likely consider the al-Marri decision outside the realm of those that without doubt do not understand.

  • DeMediacratic Nation Blogrolls

    Please give this Post/Blog a Vote - Top Blogs

    © blogger templates 3 column | Webtalks