Over at Jurist, they have the latest ruling that affects those being held in perpetuity in Gitmo.The case was brought by Guantanamo detainee Salim Hamdan. This is the same judge that originally ruled in favor of Hamdan in his case Hamdan v. Rumsfeld. The judge declared in his current ruling that since our government has passed the MCA(Military Commissions Act) this case was,according the the Jurist writeup: “clearly barred under the controversial habeas-stripping language of the new Military Commissions Act (MCA) even though it was pending at the time the Act was passed.”
The Jurist writeup also has this to say about Judge Robertson’s recent ruling:
In the context of his ruling Robertson left unaddressed Hamdan’s general arguments that the Military Commissions Act is unconstitutional “because it does not provide an adequate substitute for habeas review, because it violates the principle of separation of powers by instructing the courts to ignore the Supreme Court’s ruling that the Geneva Conventions afford judicially enforceable protections to petitioner Hamdan, because it is an unlawful Bill of Attainder, and because it violates Equal Protection.”
So, the Bush Administration gets a ruling which supports the detaining of people who have committed no crime in some cases, but their religion makes them an individual that can be held without trial or charges until our government sees fit to either charge them or release them. I do so love how the MCA also applied to everyone held prior to the bill’s passage. Isn’t America grand?