This will be one I will follow. It will set precedent if the Shrub wins. It will be important because it will either bitch-slap the Shrub's efforts to change the face of law or support his manic quest for power under the pretense of his war on terror. This case is exposing the Shrub's weak logic. His logic is that he can do whatever he wants during a time of war, under the guise of protecting us..protecting we, the people. He is full of shit up to his brown eyes sportsfans.
His minions are attempting to charge the Bin Laden chauffeur with war crimes that don't exist in our laws. Its all about presidential power, and the Supreme's will decide if the Shrub can usurp conventional authority,conventional law and try Salim Ahmed Hamdan before a military tribunal or commission.
The website Jurist, which is from the University of Pittsburgh's Law school is showcasing their guest op-ed writer on this subject, who is a former US ambassador at Large for War Crimes issues by the name of David Scheffer. Mr Scheffer states in his op-ed piece on the website: "the government's attempt to charge Salim Hamdan with conspiracy to commit war crimes-a crime that does not exist under US or International law-falls short of a violation allowing him to be prosecuted before the Presidents' military commissions and demonstrates the folly of the effort to push the square peg of terrorism into the round hole of the law of war."
The WaPo has this article about the case as well. The short of it is this,which I quote from the article: "Significant as that demand is, its potential impact is much wider, making Hamdan's case one of the most important of Bush's presidency. It is a challenge to the broad vision of presidential power that Bush has asserted since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001"
The fear here is that the Supreme's will defer to the recently enacted federal law on military commissions. Since Roberts has already ruled on this case while on the federal appeals bench, he must recuse himself. We could end up with a 4-4 tie on whether the Supreme's have the right to hear this case. Richard Lazarus, a law professor at Georgetown University who specializes in Supreme Court litigation states in the WaPo article: "Most cases have two or three or four issues. This one has 10 or 12, which makes it very hard to handicap."
We need to pray about it sportsfans...at the very least send good vibes to those robed old geezers that sit on the Supreme Court. We need them to bitch-slap the Shrub on this..even if it is Osama's damn chauffuer, who I am sure is a loathsome creature that shouldn't walk free. I do not want this dipstick to get away with anything. But I do not want the Shrub to bypass tradtional law as it will set a precedent that is dangerous. I want the Supremes to make them try this dude in our traditional court system if they have a case. I think their case is weak which is why they want to use the military tribunal system. They need to do their homework and not bypass our law system of checks and balances. As the WaPo article states: From the outset, the commissions have been plagued by questions about their fairness and workability. Critics argued that the commissions were flawed because, as Hamdan's brief, written by Georgetown University law professor Neal K. Katyal, puts it, they would try suspects "for crimes defined by the President alone, under procedures lacking basic protections, before 'judges' who are his chosen subordinates."
The Shrub has enough power now. He has more than enough. If his boys at the DOJ don't want to deal with these terrorist cases through normal and traditional courts thats too fucking bad. Because what's to say they wouldn't use this shit against our own citizens if they get away with it now. Thats my fear..and I am not alone in that fear. The President can not make up the rules as he goes along. That only worked on the playground in elementary school..not in real life.
