Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Bradley Manning: Top US legal Scholars Voice Outrage at 'Torture'
Obama professor among 250 experts who have signed letter condemning humiliation of alleged WikiLeaks source
More than 250 of America's most eminent legal scholars have signed a letter protesting against the treatment in military prison of the alleged WikiLeaks source Bradley Manning, contesting that his "degrading and inhumane conditions" are illegal, unconstitutional and could even amount to torture.
Code Pink for Peace demonstrators the detention of US Army Private Bradley Manning. More than 250 of America's most eminent legal scholars have signed a letter protesting against the treatment in military prison of the alleged WikiLeaks source Bradley Manning, contesting that his "degrading and inhumane conditions" are illegal, unconstitutional and could even amount to torture. The list of signatories includes Laurence Tribe, a Harvard professor who is considered to be America's foremost liberal authority on constitutional law. He taught constitutional law to Barack Obama and was a key backer of his 2008 presidential campaign.
Tribe joined the Obama administration last year as a legal adviser in the justice department, a post he held until three months ago.
He told the Guardian he signed the letter because Manning appeared to have been treated in a way that "is not only shameful but unconstitutional" as he awaits court martial in Quantico marine base in Virginia.
The US soldier has been held in the military brig since last July, charged with multiple counts relating to the leaking of thousands of embassy cables and other secret documents to the WikiLeaks website.
Under the terms of his detention, he is kept in solitary confinement for 23 hours a day, checked every five minutes under a so-called "prevention of injury order" and stripped naked at night apart from a smock.
Tribe said the treatment was objectionable "in the way it violates his person and his liberty without due process of law and in the way it administers cruel and unusual punishment of a sort that cannot be constitutionally inflicted even upon someone convicted of terrible offenses, not to mention someone merely accused of such offenses".
The harsh restrictions have been denounced by a raft of human rights groups, including Amnesty International, and are being investigated by the United Nations' rapporteur on torture.
Tribe is the second senior figure with links to the Obama administration to break ranks over Manning. Last month, PJ Crowley resigned as state department spokesman after deriding the Pentagon's handling of Manning as "ridiculous and counterproductive and stupid".
The intervention of Tribe and hundreds of other legal scholars is a huge embarrassment to Obama, who was a professor of constitutional law in Chicago. Obama made respect for the rule of law a cornerstone of his administration, promising when he first entered the White House in 2009 to end the excesses of the Bush administration's war on terrorism.
As commander in chief, Obama is ultimately responsible for Manning's treatment at the hands of his military jailers. In his only comments on the matter so far, Obama has insisted that the way the soldier was being detained was "appropriate and meets our basic standards".
The protest letter, published in the New York Review of Books, was written by two distinguished law professors, Bruce Ackerman of Yale and Yochai Benkler of Harvard. They claim Manning's reported treatment is a violation of the US constitution, specifically the eighth amendment forbidding cruel and unusual punishment and the fifth amendment that prevents punishment without trial.
In a stinging rebuke to Obama, they say "he was once a professor of constitutional law, and entered the national stage as an eloquent moral leader. The question now, however, is whether his conduct as commander in chief meets fundamental standards of decency".
Benkler told the Guardian: "It is incumbent on us as citizens and professors of law to say that enough is enough. We cannot allow ourselves to behave in this way if we want America to remain a society dedicated to human dignity and process of law."
He said Manning's conditions were being used "as a warning to future whistleblowers" and added: "
I find it tragic that it is Obama's administration that is pursuing whistleblowers and imposing this kind of treatment."
Ackerman pointed out that under the Pentagon's own rule book, the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Manning's jailers could be liable to prosecution for abusing him. Article 93 of the code says "any person who is guilty of cruelty toward any person subject to his orders shall be punished".
The list of professors who have signed the protest letter includes leading figures from all the top US law schools, as well as prominent names from other academic fields. Among them are Bill Clinton's former Labor Secretary Robert Reich, President Theodore Roosevelt's great-great-grandson Kermit Roosevelt, the former president of the American Civil Liberties Union Norman Dorsen and the novelist Kwame Anthony Appiah.
- Posted in

81 Comments so far
Show AllOne suspects that Obama's campaign team will not be using this letter as a springboard to catapult their warmongering, corporatist leader back into the White House.
Vote third party in 2012.
Sadly, they could. After all, Obama's greatest accomplishment has been to get Democrats to support the worst Rethug policies: predatory Middle Eastern wars, Romneycare, tax cuts for the wealthy, and the destruction of the last remnants of the New Deal and Great Society.
If Jack Bauer were a real person and not just a killbot on the Teevee, Obama could run him as his next VP candidate -- to thunderous Democratic applause.
corvo,
Edited
I used to have great respect for professor Tribe, until I learn more about him. There is still Harold Koh former dean of Yale Law School and he's the architect of the drone killing. Harold Koh an Obama legal advisor as John Yoo, Dubya legal advisor. What a pair!
I can't find Pamela S. Karlan Stanford University not in the list and I wonder why?
It's shameful for a Constitutional law professor to proliferate the systematic obliteration of the Constitution. The System considers itself above the law, and is even cynical in its disregard (e.g., referring to the Geneva Conventions as "quaint").
Obama is a Corporate bitch, a Wall Street whore, a Tom.
I'm not a Con Law pro, like The Tom, but I hear he call play some hoops. So I'm calling you out, bitch. Let's talk Con Law. Any time, any place.
Obama's dalliance with constitutional law can be filed under the rubric "Opposition Research."
'This part of the letter is BS: "President Obama...entered the national stage as an eloquent moral leader. The question now, however, is whether his conduct as Commander in Chief meets fundamental standards of decency."'
It would have been more clear, and certainly more accurate, had the author of this piece written, "President Obama...entered the national stage as a PERCEIVED eloquent moral leader."
Eloquent, he has been - moral? Well, the proof is in the pudding.
Barack W. Obama is a modern Pied Piper...with children and rats in tow.
Ah, but Jill, it's not much of a start when they're publishing it in the New York Review of Books, which has a readership of . . . several ten thousands.
You're right that NYRB tends to run weepy essays justifying just about every imperial adventure we've engaged in. I still remember when it ran Olmert's blubbery peace essay a couple of weeks before he launched Cast Lead. But really, it has no influence. Everyone who reads NYRB knows about Bradley Manning already and has decided whether or not to care. USA Today would've been a more appropriate venue.
I shall hope you're right. Even though I don't do hopey stuff.
I'm glad that these esteemed scholars are now coming forth to denounce Barry's acquiescence of Manning's torture. But, in all honesty, I wonder what took them so long. Have they now just awakened to what has been going on in AmeriKKKa since the SCOTUS selected W Bush as president?
Lawyers in Pakistan cheered, threw roses, at a murderer, and celebrated him as a hero.
I'm aware of the protests that you are referring to.
The problem is this: when a guy, a Provincial Governor, the Governor of Punjab, Salman Taseer, was murdered because he opposed Pakistan's blasphemy laws, his murderer was cheered and showered with roses, by yes, lawyers, when he was led into court.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jan/11/salmaan-taseer-assasination-pakistan-blasphemy-laws
"I can't help but roll my eyes when I'm informed I must keep a guard with me at all times now. After my father, Salmaan Taseer, was assassinated by his own security guard on 4 January – my brother Shehryar's 25th birthday – does it even matter? If the governor of Pakistan's largest province can be shot dead by a policeman assigned to protect him in broad daylight in "
" Speaking to camera crews the same day from jail, 26-year-old Qadri said he had killed my father because he had criticised the country's draconian and often misused blasphemy laws"
"Some 200 lawyers – men of the law – garlanded Qadri and showered him with pink rose petals on both his days in court. The president of the lawyers' wing of the opposition party Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz was reportedly among them. The smiling assassin has become the poster boy for the unholy ambitions of the self-deluded. Lawyers who fought for an independent judiciary are standing in support of a self-confessed murderer. This is not the Pakistan for which my grandfather, MD Taseer, fought alongside founding father Mohammad Ali Jinnah.
"
"Yesterday, a rally in support of the blasphemy laws was held in Karachi, at which mullahs incited violence against former information minister Sherry Rehman – my mother's close friend, and the brave woman I was named after – who tabled a bill in the National Assembly in November proposing blasphemy-law amendments. "
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/05/pakistan-religious-organisations-salman-taseer
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/05/pakistan-salman-taseer-liberal
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/03/pakistan-blasphemy-laws-sherry-rehman
That is what I'm referring to. Do you want American lawyers, or lawyers anywhere in the world, to take their lessons from these Pakistani lawyers?
My point is that one should not assume that those Pakistani lawyers are that all that heroic. I certainly agree that too many American lawyers are fat and lazy, when it comes to justice.
It isn't my mother's friend. If it were, my posts would be MUCH more vitriolic. The stuff in quotes is from the article, the first link. The author's father was the murdered governor, who opposed the blasphemy law (which was imposed by that ally / puppet of America, Zia ul-Haq, and given that, her article is remarkably calm). Her mother's friend, another prominent opponent of the blasphemy law (and one of the few public opponents still alive), is now a target.
It's possible, just possible, that Tribe doesn't belong in the dock at The Hague with his adorable Frankenstein Monster, but he supported the Imperial President (not to mention the Manchurian Imperial Candidate) much too long. To hell with Tribe.
For this Bradley Manning travesty alone, Obama deserves to lose big-time in 2012. The Guardian has it right when it points out that Obama made the rule of law a cornerstone of his campaign. To many of us, this is what his promise of "change" was all about.
I never expected any revolutionary change with Obama, but I must admit, I thought at the very least, this former constitutional law professor would begin to reinstate the constitutional rights that had been systematically stripped away by the Bush administration. But what does he do instead? He expands these torture policies, beginning the process of applying them to American citizens.
I don't know what is going on with this country, but I am beginning to think that people much more powerful than the president have decided that it is time to turn the USA into a full-blown fascist dictatorship (not this quasi-fascism we've been living under for some time). Obama appears to be a more than willing accomplice, but I really wonder if he has any power at all.
Change, it appears, will never come through the ballot box, because it doesn't seem to matter who is president -- the policies are always the same.
Of course, they will do what they always do, and try to convince us to vote Democrat in order to preserve the woman's right to choose and the one or two remaining New Deal programs. But, whatever, I'm not falling for it again. Both parties have to go.
The current US president is a fraud. Mitt Romney looks like the next president. Gee, January 2013 will see the end of the current nightmare.
and the start of the next
Jill,
No, not lack of courage. He's one of them. You should know by now or still doubtful? I have a lot of respect for you. You have have many supporters here. I am a lone voice, due to my tinny weeny different approach, but still in the same boat. :-)
What I'm thinking is that you must be "one of them" in order to be tapped for the role of president, which is largely ceremonial.
Of course, he theoretically has the power to undertake a wide range of actions, and in that way is not powerless. But anyone who would be inclined to take independent, courageous stands would never be allowed anywhere near the White House to begin with.
Look what they did to the Green gubernatorial candidate in California last year. They arrested her and hauled her off to jail for simply trying to attend the gubernatorial debate -- for which she had a ticket.
The system is rigged and anyone who actually poses an alternative to the two-party fascist state will not be tolerated. This is what I mean by saying that Obama is essentially powerless. He was tapped by the ruling elite to be the figurehead running the country, and is just doing what he's told.
It's a mistake to think that he just "lacks courage." He is essentially a sock puppet, just like Bush before him, and Clinton before him. It will just go on and on like this until we make a revolution, or the system collapses under its own corruption.
DC-CPH,
Cannot disagree with what you said. So, what are you going to do about? Vote for Obama again by default?
Do you remember the Simpsons episode where the tentacular aliens Kang and Kodos posed as Bob Dole and Bubba Clinton?
Remember the reaction when they were exposed? To quote: "It's a two party system. You have to vote for one of us."
Yeah, it's EXACTLY like that.
"My fellow Americans. As a young boy, I dreamed of being a baseball, but tonight I say, we must move forward, not backward, upward not forward, and always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom."
And:
"Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos!"
Still one of my favorite lines. And that particular "Treehouse of Horror" segment is a true classic, perhaps the best of the lot. It only improves with age!
Galenwainwright,,
Sorry I dun have the luxury owning a TV. Lost that too. Don't need one and can do without it. I still have my used laptops from craigslist. With Livestation, I can watch Aljazeera, BBC, C-Span, RTV, DN , Oldies FM and more 24/7 for free anywhere. :-)
The way Obama turned from Progressive to Uber-conservative immediately after the election gives credence to assertions that he is not a "born" US citizen; therefore, the ruling elite have sometime to blackmail him with.
One has to wonder why he turned so suddenly?
Here's a good summary of obomber's actions prior to his selection as president that was written many months prior to said selection.
http://www.counterpunch.org/gonzalez02292008.html
"his record suggests that he is incapable of ushering in any kind of change I'd like to see. It is one of accommodation and concession to the very political powers that we need to reign in and oppose if we are to make truly lasting advances."
Matt Gonzalez, 2/29/08
Actually, he never "turned." He just uttered vague nothings about "hope" and "change" that attracted those progressives who weren't paying attention, but as Senator from Illinois he distinguished himself as an enthusiastic supporter of the Imperial War Presidency -- when he bothered to show up to vote, that is.
I do not like hearing the repeated refrain that Obama the candidate was the same as Obama the President. The same type of people repeatedly contend that the left, progressive, liberal factions among us were duped by mindless "hope" and "change."
It takes some discipline, but watch the whole film. The first 10 minutes will debunk the idea that we were thoughtless patsies taken in by stupid promises with no substance. Mr. Obama did indeed make very specific campaign promises which he has totally renounced as President. He was not presented as an empty suit that simpletons became groupies for.
He was presented as a man of principle and backbone who would right a score of wrongs. What he has done to my hero, Mr. Manning, is an atrocity as bad as any that Amon Leopold Göth committed at Plaszów in _Schindler's List_. Mr. Obama's use of drones and Tomahawks, his continuance of Guantanamo, his permitted black sites, his lack of backbone about nearly every political issue, especially reprehensible are his caving in on those concerning public programs and public services.
We were lied to. I believe he knew he was lying when he did it. And their enormity was as bad as Powell/Bush/Cheney's WMD's in Saddham's Iraq. I'm disgusted by him and will never vote for him for any reason, even if he paid me an exorbitant "bonus" for doing so. And I'm poor, have no job, no insurance and can barely pay my loans. I have the time and discipline to watch: Lifting the Veil: Obama and the Failure of Capitalist Democracy {Full Film}
www.youtube.com
I hope you do, too.
Well, there's the problem. You listened to his promises; you didn't investigate his voting record in the United States Senate.
Thanks for the heads up on the film, dwyerj1. And by the way, I agree with your take on Obama - he's far worse than he let on, even for those of us who knew he was no progressive as he claimed to be when he campaigned. Even Cynthia McKinney has said that Obama is far, far worse than she ever thought he would be.
.....and where is the AP, the NYTimes, the WSJ, the WashPo?
....or a mainstream reporter to demand that Obama tell us why he thinks Manning's treatment is appropriate?
A courageous young man disgusted with the lies and horrors of war sits alone in solitary confinement while a monster sits in the oval office, a guardian of wealth, a dispenser of death.
- - a master baiter. [Election 2008 was bait & switch.]
The entire system of justice in America is in decline and hanging by a thread.
http://www.gpln.com/ijuror.htm
Rewind to the election of 2010: I remember vividly the culture war that unfolded on this site between the non-Obama (third party voters) and the true believers advocating his cause. Many of those who were THEN bashing us, are now on this site as some of Obama's harshest critics. (I commend their turn around, if not their vision circa 2010.)
One of the arguments that circulated in 2010 and 2009 was that Obama was a legal scholar tuned to civil rights mandates and law. They told us that this was a major difference between Obama and Nader or Mckinney and he would honor those legal precedents.
But now we know who the real Obama is and that happens to be light years away from his legal education and experience.
Obama has proven again and again, that he is someone who upholds the extremes of the military industrial complex; he is a man who never seen a fight, he was not willing to run away from with all due haste; and perhaps more importantly, he is always open to capitulate to the Tea Party extremes, if that means a protracted and brutal fight awaits him. Or to put it differently, Private Manning, has no more value to the man, than the innocents he routinely murders via his war policies using unmaned drone strikes on non combatants who Amnesty International asserts has taken over 50K lives of innocent woman and children.
"Hope and Change are so YESTERDAY!" OS
Hope and change are still alive and well... just far away from Washington DC presently :-)
The ancient Greeks included 'hope' with all the other evils that beset the world in Pandora's Box.
'Hope' is not a good thing. Hope is what makes you sit on the side of the road, waiting for 'someone' to rescue you, to do it for you.
'Change' is the everyday process of the world. But there has been no 'change' in Washington, or in the US as a whole. 'Change' is now what you have left in you pockets after you have been robbed by the Corporations, politicians and the entire 'free enterprise' system. 'Change' is what you are expected to shelter and feed your family with.
Hope is like gold. Pretty, expensive and utterly useless. You can't eat gold, and you can't eat hope.
Agreed, no change happening in Washington. But DC isn't the cutting edge, so no surprise there. :)
Also agreed that many people hoped that Obama would swoop down and save the day (so they themselves wouldn't have to do the work), and we know how that's worked out...
On the other hand, I do think there is a tremendous amt of real, actual change happening in the US, by so-called ordinary people. It's below the radar, is all. Lots and lots of people actively re-connecting with Nature and with each other, sharing information on how to opt out of the current system and how to live more simply. And to do it on a small budget.
I also think that the many, many people who are engaged in quality change are subtly affecting the overall vibe here. Maybe in a small way, it's given some encouragement (ie faith or hope or whatever the kids are calling it these days) to yet more people so that they too can opt out of the false hope of political promises and get rich quick fantasies, and actually do something courageous themselves to be part of the change they wish to see.
(Which I hope is what those professors were doing when they wrote this letter about Manning)
You are right about hope being the antithesis of action and therefore evil in sense.
BUT
Your mythology is a bit mythtaken. Pandora didn't have a box - it was actually a jar or maybe an amphora. When she opened it the evils began to pop out . Realizing her mistake, she put the lid back on leaving hope lying on the bottom of the jar where, supposedly, it resides even today in the bottom of Obama's jar.
Free Bradley Manning ? I would sincerely hope I am wrong, but believe it will not happen as he is the man who knows too much. Trump may be full of it, but his investigation that Barry is not an U.S. citizen; where he says it is the con of the century, would be so sweet if he exposed the evidence that would prove it. If Trumps crazy ( it seems to me ) theory could be proven true, then Obama could join Mr. Manning.
"...Laurence Tribe, a Harvard professor who is considered to be America's foremost liberal authority on constitutional law. He taught constitutional law to Barack Obama and was a key backer of his 2008 presidential campaign."
Harvard has long been an approved CIA headhunting ground. Many, many students at Harvard have gone on to long and successful careers working for America's premier spook factory. Barry himself later worked for a documented CIA front operation, Business International Corporation, with multiple trips to Afghanistan he refuses to talk about to this day. Reporters who have asked about his time with BI have had their Presidential/White House access revoked.
This professor pissing and moaning about how badly the Obama Junta is abusing Pvt. Manning is just more smoke and mirrors.
Without his teaching, Obama would not be the Corporate whore he is today.
I could not agree more. " Without his teaching Obama would not be the Corporate whore he is today ".
Excellent commment and badly needed perspective, thanks!
How are these "badly needed comments"? What in them is valuable? What in them helps move matters forward in the direction you espouse? What in them would encourage anyone in the majority of people with influence even approaching Tribe's and as yet unwilling to speak critically to speak out aganst what you oppose?
The truth is always badly needed, whether one likes it or not.
I studied constitutional law with con law professors, including Gerald Frug, now at Harvard. Obama was not a "constitutional law professor". He was a Chicago politician who was, at a very young age, teaching some classes in which the students read, and were quized on, con law cases.
Most accurately: adjunct or visiting faculty in constitutional law. But I still say that any contact Obama had with constitutional law can be filed under "opposition research."
More accurately, a Chicago Community Organizer who thought a church was a neat, free place to hold meetings about organizing, but not actually organizing.
After a few hundred such, Barack wondered who they were speaking to when they all closed their eyes and spoke out loud. "There's a God," someone explained to him. "What party does he belong to?" Obama replied.
Trylon
That too, of course. Utterly cynical how he used those folks as steppingstones to power.
Our president has sold his soul to the devil, the multi-horned devil of greed, hubris, lies, war and destruction. He has joined the anti-American cabal of the Bush administration and his behavior is indefensible. We cannot give Obama the benefit of the doubt given his actions, I don't care what he promises in his speeches.
When I said in the last election that Obama is the best con man I have ever seen;' I guess Tribe just proved my point, as it looks like he conned his own Harvard Professor! He also conned some of my progressive friends. What a travesty!