Roberts is delusional as usual! Amazing how well MKUltra works.

I hope Justice John Roberts burns in hell, stupid a$$hole

"The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times."

Would someone please inform the other two branches of government.

One should certainly applaud the ruling, but the narrow margin on such a fundamental principle is not very encouraging. In any case, the likelihood of any of the detainees actually having their 'day in court' appears (to me) to be quite remote. The realities that any such hearings could reveal would be much too embarrassing.

The narrow margin is troubling, but the overall decision is a victory for those who believe in justice.

right on, Arvy. i forget where i heard it, but some officer at gitmo was quoted saying, "we have to get some convictions. if we don't get convictions, it would call the whole process into question."

in other words, the "global war on terror" is a complete fraud, as many of us have been saying since before the invasions/occupations.

The fraudulent Congress won't do it but the Supreme Court will. The Constitution lives albeit battered and dismissed by the criminal Bush Administration. Are these acts by the Bushies not Treasonous?

You bemoan the narrow margin on which the extreme court stopped Bush's Kangaroo trials in Gitmo but this has been a long process getting this far down in the sewer. All one has to do is look at the anti-privacy laws (read drug laws) passed in the 80's all for our own good. Many aspects of these laws were passed by 5-4 majorities. Zero tolerance laws, drug testing of students and employees, search and seizure laws all narrowly passed by the Extremes to fulfill the pre-ordained political agenda of slowly draining away our power and giving it instead to corporations. Happened under Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and his fraudulence Bush the inferior. The US has been completely co-opted by corporations. They are vampires sucking the blood from you, your children and your country while you willingly and eagerly bear your necks, your children's, and the coutrie's to their vile and insatiable appetites. We need an amandement to our constitution separating lobbiest from state. That is if our constitution was worth the paper it was written on any longer.

"Don't be the right wing, don't be the left wing, be the brain."

Withdrawn Consent

"the most generous set of procedural protections ever afforded aliens detained by this country as enemy combatants."

Aslo the FIRST set of procedural "protections" afforded alien "enemy combatants"

Duh!

roberts is a fundie freak

Just one example of how many ignorant so-called "intelligent" people in positions of power, like Roberts, are rampant throughout government/justice system. Ideological extremism (or greed) rather than fairness, liberty and justice poisons everything.

Unfortunately, the Supreme Court does not control the armed forces or the Justice Department. If Bush decides to ignore, circumvent or otherwise thwart enforcement of this ruling, the only branch of government that can bring him to heel is Congress by way of impeachment. Guess the inmates at Guantanamo shouldn't hold their breath.

A few judges exercise true wisdom. But the great many of them are merely politicans sitting in high chairs wearing funny-looking, back robes.

Well..as Andrew Jackson told the Supreme Court when eviction of the Cherokee from Georgia to Oklahoma was ruled unconstitutional: "It is your ruling. You enforce it." Meaning, the Executive has the Army.

The Supreme Court has little or no meaning in jurisprudence.

They are appointed---always politically.

They have no enforcement power.

They have no body or group to account to.

The members are appointed for life.

(all of the above is an example of "good work if you can get it" )

They are a wonderful experiment----which has essentially expressed a negative example.

It must be admitted that they have made a few, but precious few "good decisions"---most of those could realistically be attributed to accident, or by virtue of the law of averages----if you stick to something long enough you may get some things right----

On the positive end----if you know what NOT to do, the only answer left is to follow the negative example-----in the other direction.

Human beings made all this up-----only they can make it work properly.

The Great Mystery here is; how can so many people, human beings all of them, allow representatives of a lower order of primates to ascend to such powerful positions in the first place?
That is speaking of not only the appointees but the other "lower order of primates" who perform the "appointments"!

"In dissent, Chief Justice John Roberts criticized his colleagues for striking down what he called, 'the most generous set of procedural protections ever afforded aliens detained by this country as enemy combatants.'"

"detained . . . as enemy combatants."

I thought they were detained as "unlawful enemy combatants"
which is a whole different story. If they have broken the law, the Constitution of the United States says there must
be "a speedy and public trial, by an impatial jury [of people from] the district where the crime shall have been committed. It's way too late for speedy and I don't see the U.S. flying in juries from Afghanistan and Pakistan. Also defendats have the right to subpoena witnesses for their defense. Seems the U.S. has made enough mistakes that the "unlawfuls" should be let go with time served.

Now, if they are "lawful enemy combatants" and they are detained, the conditions in which they are held should reflect their lawful status.

So, to hear Justice Roberts tell it, these are "the most generous set of procedural protections ever afforded aliens detained by this country as enemy combatants". Roberts clearly has his nose stuck too far up the wrong place. Quite aside from the deplorable status of "due process" for these prisoners, the real question is not whether the current rules are "the best ever", but whether they meet the minimum standards required, and as afforded by the Constitution. And therein lies my problem with right wing judges: they bleat on about the need for "strict construction" of the Constitution, as if the answers lie in a parsing of the text of the document itself, but when the facts are against them they prefer to use a "sliding scale" of rights afforded by the same Constitution. Sorry Roberts, but the Constitution either guarantees a particular right or it does not; however, what it does NOT allow for are interpretations that are based in moral relativity, which is what you and your kind have tried in this ruling.

Sean Hannity is screaming about this like he's badly in need of a diaper change. He started by going into detail about an old FOX story about how al Qaeda tortures prisoners. Then he had a call from the angry father of a soldier killed 5 years ago. The father said we should institute Sharia law and cut off the prisoners heads. He also said there were no moderate Muslims, only sleeper cells. Sean sympathized with him.

Sean also went into a rant about radical judges legislating from the bench.

It's Habeas Corpus Sean, get used to it.

"I thought they were detained as "unlawful enemy combatants" which is a whole different story."

This new category of prisoner, invented by the Bush administration, seems to have been forgotten in the intervening years.

If Roberts classifies them as enemy combatants then they are simply what used to be known as prisoners of war, otherwise if they are terrorists acting against humanity they are simply criminals.

can it be, that the dissention chief justice's argument is: "the most generous set of procedural protections ever afforded aliens detained by this country as enemy combatants."?

i haven't seen one generous act, from our government in a very long time. i have seen assaults, systemic neglect, murder, and disgusting mismanagement of the U.S. government from the top down.

i hope that the chief justice might reevaluate his word 'generous', perhaps by changing it to 'assaultive', and thereby gaining the full meaning of the majority ruling.

wild

What took the court so long to follow the Constitution? Just because Bush thinks it's a "gd piece of paper", it doesn't mean he's right to deny prisoners habeua corpus.

Some of those people are innocent, pulled out of Iraq sometimes based on hearsay or being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

How would Bush like spending six years in the Cuban holding pen without any rights?

The court got this decision right.

I guess I should have paid more attention to my history classes in high school (funny, but I kept getting distracted by girls, cars, sports, beer, rock & roll, et al......) because I vaguely remember something about some document that was supposed to be really important yatayatayata.... that says something about "All men are created equal....and endowed by Viagra, oops! I mean their creator,,,,entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, yatayatayata....." Maybe it was just one of those daydreams I always seemed to get about three in the afternoon just before school let out.

Well If McCain wins, we can forget about the supreme court having any more liberal members.

"If McCain wins, we can forget about the supreme court having any more liberal members.'

Which is why we all have to do everything possible to get Obama elected. Otherwise, things will get even worse than they are now under W.

This is a GREAT DAY in US history, even though the rePUGS are disgusting. I have my feelings about the USofA, having been THROWN out unceremoniously 15 years ago with NO hearing by a Clinton Dem, Paul Wellstone.

I can hardly wait for IMPEACHMENT - and refer this list to the new suggested Constitution of MurKa to discuss (remember: the earthchanges are coming soon and the forfeiture laws must still be overturned ..)

http://ladybroadoak.blogspot.com/2008/06/proposed-change-to-us-consitution.html

So the mobsters on the Supreme Court decided on the obvious, that people have constitutional rights. Ok, are we supposed to celebrate this?

Have we sunk so deep into this nightmarish administration that we view this as any kind of victory? America is DONE folks, just stick a fork in it.

To someone above who made reference to Sean Hannity:

I quite honestly like to think of myself as relatively open minded. I subscribe to GOPUSA (just to see how "the other half lives") Trouble is, they don't have the guts to allow their daily readers to be heard, as is the case here with Common Dreams. I do manage to be able to "vent" to some degree by blasting some of the writers of the articles or by some guy who apparently heads up the organization named Bobby Eberly.

When it comes to Fox Noise, however, I am constantly distracted by the fact that while watching I uncontrollably conjure up images of what Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly would look like after a shovel was taken to their respective faces.

An article a short while ago in the NY Times quoted Judge Kennedy as making some statement to the effect that we cannot turn the constitution on and off as it suits us. I guess the judge hasn't been paying a lot of attention to what's been going on within the Bush administration these past 7 years.

The Times article also mentioned the possibility of closing Gitmo but raised the question as to what would be done with the present detainees.

I first thought that they could be divided up equally and work for room and board at the Bush ranch in Crawford, Texas and the McCain ranch, somewhere in Arizona.

I then had second thoughts about it as it might put out of work some illegal aliens that are probably already employed there.

As to the approximate 270 mentioned that are there presently, if they have been detained for as long as 6 years WITHOUT being charged, terrorists or not, they should be allowed to sue the U. S. Government for false imprisonment.

I regret that I am not in the legal profession: if I were, I'd be glad to represent them PRO BONO!

Here it is. This is very good news.

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/07pdf/06-1195.pdf

Does this ruling extend to those people held by the US in Military Prisons established since this nightmare began, ie, in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Tobee4:

>>Does this ruling extend to those people held by the US in Military Prisons established since this nightmare began, ie, in Iraq and Afghanistan?>>

Not this case, but the other one does apply to prisoners in Iraq and elsewhere:

Here is a summary of the other case:

http://www.commondreams.org/news2008/0612-03.htm

And here is the SC ruling:

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/07pdf/06-1666.pdf

i'm glad our supreme court majority won that ruling away from pinhead justices who opposed fair and decent humane rights since what the detainees have suffered over the extended period has, in my mind, far exceeded any final punishment any court of law could impose.

But... if you tie the Supreme Court's hands with some obscure and antiquated charter, the terrorists have won!

piltdownman has it right. The decision will be ignored by the bushites and nothing will happen to bring about any change in the status quo. Gutless congress will not act, so the decison, as welcome as it is, will mean nothing.

Testing, testing.

And it took how long -- 6 years? -- to get to this decision. It looks to me like a few rats may have sensed there could be a very slight change in wind direction and are now trying to look as if they were doing their job all along, just in case anyone says anything.

Bush looked coldly furious during his press conference when he mentioned the ruling, as if how dare they cross HIM. Brrrr.....

CJM, "It looks to me like a few rats may have sensed there could be a very slight change in wind direction"

I think I too feel slight breeze brewing. Articles of impeachment. New supreme court rulings. New books about "What Happened" by the crooks own trusted press secretary. New testimony coming up on the Valerie Plame case, a routing of racism within the CIA, Pentagon Propaganda caught with their pants down, calls for citizens arrests of the crooks, Waxman going for the juggular...

I can only hope it bears fruit... so we can toss the bad apples.

Technically Roberts is correct, a little bit anyways. This country has been under a state of emergency since 2001. During WW II, FDR gave the military authority to detain anyone they felt was a threat. His powers were no greater than Bush's. All Presidents starting from FDR become dicators during a time of war or state of emergency. Many Japanese were rounded up and placed in camps, while German-Americans were largely left alone for the most part. Some call it racism.

But consider the reversal. The MCA came about because the SC ruled that Bush needed congressional authorization to detain prisoners at GITMO as he did. Me thinks some neocons are getting worried about Obama or someone sending them to GITMO (as they could rule anyone who was an enemy combatant was no longer an American, since that label is a verdict of Guilty of treason, according to a broad interpretation of the poorly writtent act). So they may reverse some of the powers they have given Bush.

All of this, as well as the impeachment talk, and the very useful book that portrays Bush as stupid and incompetenet, but not criminal, is likely a gimick to make you think you have change coming with Bush leaving. You don't. The system has been compromised.

bad apples do rot and eventually fall to the ground.

MiMiCcS,
"All of this, as well as the impeachment talk, and the very useful book that portrays Bush as stupid and incompetenet, but not criminal"

Actually, you are wrong. The book does present specific accounts from McClellan of President Shrub admitting to criminal acts. You can't spin this MiMiCcS.

from wednesday's democracynow hour long interview:

AMY GOODMAN: "Former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan has agreed to testify before the House Judiciary Committee on the Bush administration's role in the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame. McClellan was asked to appear over his assertion in his new book that top White House officials deliberately misled him about their role in the leak of Plame's identity. The disclosure drew the attention of Judiciary Committee Chair John Conyers, who said, "This alleged activity could well extend beyond the scope of the offenses for which Scooter Libby has been convicted and deserves further attention." McClellan is expected to testify before the committee publicly and under oath on June 20.

NancyH, said "Just one example of how many ignorant so-called "intelligent" people in positions of power, like Roberts, are rampant throughout government/justice system. Ideological extremism (or greed) rather than fairness, liberty and justice poisons everything."

I think the second sentence of your statement basically of trumps the first one. There is no ignorance here, only a contemptible attempt to justify greed-tinged, fundamentalist hatreds and bigotry.

Now lets go after the brain dead agencies and local watch groups for violating the 4th amendment right to privacy being waged against thousnds of Americans.

I have a question about the 87 billion dollars per year being awarded to private contractors that are building the National and Interntional spy network.

How much of that money is going to warrentless spying???
Cointelpro tactics are being tought to the IAFF (International FireFighters),Citizen Crop,and local Neighborhood watch groups,TIPS programs.

Local and Federal agencys are training civilian groups to conduct warrentless 24/7 survielene on thousands of innocent Amercans accross this country. They need suspects To keep the money train going and to builD thier community watch groups using fear of these suspects.
Slander campaigns, and Cointelpro tactics are used to control and destroy thier targets while the local watch groups are desensitized to the torturous tactics.
Is this EAST Berlin? Is the Stazi Police here in America?
Please look into this Nation wide abuse of money and our constitutional rights by law enforemnet agencies using local watch groups to conduct illegal surveilence.

When did we as a nation decide to allow non-law enforcement volunteer groups to conduct warrentless survielence on Americans.

This is a direct result of the USA Patriot Act and King Georges CIA buddys.They are all over this country setting up these covert groups that attack innocent Americans for political and financial gain every day.

This is torture!!!! How many times do you have to hear that before you act.
Americans hate torture, and this government under the cloak of Patriotism has setup the biggest torture spy network in the world using law enforcement directing local community watch groups.

NO IMMUNIY for these groups ,Verizon ,Infragard,Citzen Corp, IAFF.

Some one cut off these funds to the CIA and FBI sponsered neighborhood TERRORIST TORTURE PROGRAMS NOW!!!!!!!

"America is at war with radical Islamists," Scalia wrote,confirming that once again a delusional politico is making important decisions on your behalf.
Many Americans are at war with corporations, and institutions that have sold them down the river in the name of profit. You'd have to conclude his narcissistic honor is living in an alternate reality, somewhere in the pages of Leviticus.

One of the reasons why the gang of four on our Supreme Court was dead wrong by their vote against the extension of "habeas corpus" to the Guantanamo prisoners is that the justification for maintaining the universal protection is the same today as it was when the first articles of the Bill of Rights were framed. It was obviously clear to the framers that the new country needed lots of immigrants from the "Old World". They also realized that these immigrants, especially those from Continental Europe, needed reassurance that they would not be thrown into jail here to rot there forever, an experience that was all too common in nearly all of their native countries. Today, given the energy crisis and the looming "Global Warming", our country needs lots of immigrants that are highly trained in engineering, science, and medicine because we are not "producing" enough ourselves. Once again, these valuable immigrants, especially from Middle Eastern countries, must be reassured that they will not be thrown into jail here to rot there forever like the prisoners at Guantanamo. Justices Roberts, Scalia, Alito, and Thomas may have succeeded in scaring some of them enough to stay where they are.

Quick quiz: do you remember which Democratic Senators voted "aye" to confirm Roberts, Scalia, and Alito? Will they whine now "If I had known then what I know today.....?" Do not hold your breath. They will only lambaste the gang of four whom they installed where they are now and no recall!

In a blistering dissent, Justice Antonin Scalia said the decision "will make the war harder on us. It will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed."

And what section of the laws of the land is THAT position based on, you neofascist pinhead?

The president, in Rome on Thursday, said, "It was a deeply divided court, and I strongly agree with those who dissented. So that makes it a tie then..and Dick Cheney argees with me, so we win...so there!!"

"The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times."
But will they survive the Cheney/Bush coup?

Well tetti, things could get worse.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FiQJ9Xp0xxU

http://www.thefrown.com/index.php?/cartoons/55/495

McCain has now flip=flopped on the Supreme Court ruling and has sided with Bush. He's a good example of someone who has been imprisoned too long, not knowing whether he would see his family or country again. It affected his brain.

If McCain doesn't understand the Constiution, how would he be able to defend it if he (God forbid) became president?

Gitmo is a piece of the US in Cuba. It is included in our rights under the Constitution, no matter what the Bush guys think.

How would we know if all 200 plus prisoners are guilty if they have never had a chance to give their defense to a court?

And we're seeking democracy all over the world? Try finding it here first.

Here is a good analysis of the meaning of this ruling:

(From the Center for Constitutional Rights, the group that brought the case to the SC.)

http://ccrjustice.org/learn-more/faqs/legal-analysis%3A-boumediene-v.-bush/al-odah-v.-united-states

tks earthian for the hyperlinks.

wild