US Supreme Court Blocks Guantanamo Bay Military Tribunals

The US Supreme Court has ruled that the military tribunals set up by President Bush and his administration to try prisoners at Guantanamo Bay are illegal and must be abandoned. The ruling means US officials will have to come up with a new policy/policies to prosecute at least 10 alleged "enemy combatants" awaiting trial. In addition the ruling does not dispute the government's right to detain suspects.





The story is still breaking so full ramifications of this decision are unknown too me, however I do think this means that the president will be forced to move all the prisoners to other countries or just release them to their home country of origin.

Later news is now reporting that this ruling does not prohibit the US from putting them on trial. The ruling simply blocks a Military Tribunal while leaving a trial by Military Court Marshal perfectly legal.

US Supreme Court Brief in Full

This is starting to make some sense now in that a Court Marshal does afford prisoners almost the same privileges as our civilian courts do. The good part about a Court Marshal is they do not get endless appeals as is the case with our civilian court system.


[edit on 6/29/2006 by shots]

[edit on 29-6-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]

Good. I am sick and tired of this administration behaving that it is either above the law or a law unto itself. Unfortunately I am reminded of what Andrew Jackson said when Chief Justice Marshall ruled that the eviction of the Cherokee from their homes was illegal. "Justice marshall has made his decision, now let Justice Marshall inforce it." Won't change anything Bush will do whatever he wants until he is either removed from office or his term ends. Unfortuately.

As shots pointed out this ruling does not mean Gitmo has to be shut down, or that all the detainees have to be released only the few who were being tried have to now be tried in another way. Furthermore to give some historical precedents, during WWII Roosevelt had the military try and execute several German spies who were caught in the US after they infiltrated via submarine with the intent to sabotage US facilities, just keep that in mind folks.

www.prisonplanet.com...

look at the vid on here. the government will do what it wants anyway.

Furthermore to give some historical precedents, during WWII Roosevelt had the military try and execute several German spies who were caught in the US after they infiltrated via submarine with the intent to sabotage US facilities, just keep that in mind folks.

Keep what in mind? An incident from a world war which has precedence on a bogus war on terror against individuals who we know nothing about other than what the current administration alleges? There is a fundamental difference between your example which occured with spies from the country which procured an entire world war and a few individuals who hail from no sovereign and face illegal detainment.

Luxifero

Originally posted by andy1033
www.prisonplanet.com...

look at the vid on here. the government will do what it wants anyway.

I will have to agree with you . . . sadly but true, after all the present administration is under war powers and the president has that in his favor to pursue any avenue in his given powers to find ways to keep doing what he does.

No, Guantanamo will no be closed by any means . . . and prisoners in Guantanamo will never be able to see the light in any of our courts in the states.

They just . . . will fade away into nothingness.

All they have to do is transfer it to a privately owned corporation... kinda like all the black budget defense stuff. That way it's not on the books, and a freedom of information request will turn up nothing.

Just fyi, Bush has said in recent days that he wants to close Gitmo, the sooner the better.

This ruling is not a setback for the president, in that the prisoners mut be released or Gitmo must be closed. It leaves the door open to work on other methods of trying these detainees, which in effect, lengthens their stay while alternate methods are debated.

Another actual plus about this decision is that it should serve to quiet some of the voices that were concerned about this SCOTUS being a rubber stamp for Bush's policies.

Originally posted by jsobeckyAnother actual plus about this decision is that it should serve to quiet some of the voices that were concerned about this SCOTUS being a rubber stamp for Bush's policies.

Until you realize that the two appointees made under Bush supported the government...

Chief Justice John Roberts was sidelined in the case because as an appeals court judge he had backed the government in this case last year. That ruling was overturned Thursday.

The other three conservative justices,
Antonin Scalia,
Clarence Thomas and
Samuel Alito, strongly supported the government.

Link.

Small government my ass...

Mod Edit: Small Link To Match Government.

[edit on 29/6/2006 by Mirthful Me]

The ruling suggests that they should be tried under a courts martial, to be clear, not the american judicial system. It is saying that the ad hoc "Military Commissions" are 'improperly structured'.

even if they do close it, i am sure the same things will go on elsewhere.

He already said he was going to go around the Supreme Court with it. How nice it must be to spit on the people we have appointed to interperet our laws because his monkeyboys weren't powerful enough to judge in his favor, he is gonna bypass them.

I'm glad the Supreme Court has finally ruled on this issue. It clarifies the issue of what to do with the so-called "illegal combatants." Before this ruling they were in an uncertain status and trying to impose sentences on them would have left everyone unhappy. Now the Bush Administration will either have to try them in civil courts or in court martials and it doesn't matter to me which way they choose.

Of course Congress could reinstate the military tribunal methodology by passing new leglislation to set up the framework for such. From what I have read since this ruling was handed down they may decide to do exactly that.

What about giving trials to all those detained in Gitmo instead of indefinate detention? The War on Terror is not a real war. These people are suspected criminals, not combatants. 10 on trial out of hundreds detained is a farce.

No one is surprised that these kangaroo courts were deemed illegal by the US Supreme Court. This should hopefully assist in the law suits Donald Rumsfeld, Bush and Dick Cheney are facing regarding the illegal detention and torture experienced by those detained in Gitmo.

This War on Terror crud is starting to fray at the edges and im glad!

In other news I hear that AIDS viruses are being detained as illegal pathogens in Camp Petri Dish. The Executive branch maintains its right, under war time powers (War on AIDS), to carry out any interogation tactics they wish including physical stress methods

[edit on 30/6/06 by subz]

Originally posted by ThePieMaN
He already said he was going to go around the Supreme Court with it. How nice it must be to spit on the people we have appointed to interperet our laws because his monkeyboys weren't powerful enough to judge in his favor, he is gonna bypass them.

Where did he say he was going to "go around the Supreme Court"? That's total BS.

Originally posted by Astronomer70
Now the Bush Administration will either have to try them in civil courts or in court martials and it doesn't matter to me which way they choose.

I'd rather see them face courts martial.

f course Congress could reinstate the military tribunal methodology by passing new leglislation to set up the framework for such. From what I have read since this ruling was handed down they may decide to do exactly that.

Yes, as a matter of fact, some members of Congress have been proposing this approach for months.

Originally posted by subz
What about giving trials to all those detained in Gitmo instead of indefinate detention? The War on Terror is not a real war. These people are suspected criminals, not combatants. 10 on trial out of hundreds detained is a farce.

How do you know they are not combatants?

This should hopefully assist in the law suits Donald Rumsfeld, Bush and Dick Cheney are facing regarding the illegal detention and torture experienced by those detained in Gitmo.

This should hopefully help to have any frivolous lawsuits like that summarily dismissed.

In other news I hear that AIDS viruses are being detained as illegal pathogens in Camp Petri Dish. The Executive branch maintains its right, under war time powers (War on AIDS), to carry out any interogation tactics they wish including physical stress methods

Lame. Who would be against wiping out the AIDS virus?

Originally posted by jsobecky
How do you know they are not combatants?

The lack of a trial for the vast majority of those held points to an endemic lack of evidence that shows they are combatants.

Originally posted by jsobecky
Lame. Who would be against wiping out the AIDS virus?

LOL! No one is, but instead of using soldiers we use doctors and professors. Police and law enforcement should be used to fight terrorism, not soldiers. Oh the irony jsobecky.

[edit on 30/6/06 by subz]

I'm sorry to be so brief, and I'm sorrry to not be contributing, but I HAVE to say this or I WILL explode.

I loathe George W. Bush, his father, his father's father, and anyone related to this walking peice of ignorant, abusive filth.

Sorry, had to clear the air their for a sec....

Seriously, this guy is a freakin psycho on two feet. Does anyone really think ANY S.C. ruling is going to stop Bush or the Bush family????

[edit on 30-6-2006 by JamesLimelight]

Originally posted by jsobecky
Just fyi, Bush has said in recent days that he wants to close Gitmo, the sooner the better.

He has said many other thins that were untrue, way past counting, in fact.

Originally posted by subz

Originally posted by jsobecky
How do you know they are not combatants?

The lack of a trial for the vast majority of those held points to an endemic lack of evidence that shows they are combatants.

They can be held until the end of hostilities. You cannot deduce that because they have had no trial, they are not combatants.

Originally posted by jsobecky
Lame. Who would be against wiping out the AIDS virus?

LOL! No one is, but instead of using soldiers we use doctors and professors. Police and law enforcement should be used to fight terrorism, not soldiers. Oh the irony jsobecky.

Only if you (mistakenly) assume that terrorism is a criminal act and not an act of war.

Originally posted by subz
What about giving trials to all those detained in Gitmo instead of indefinate detention? The War on Terror is not a real war. These people are suspected criminals, not combatants. 10 on trial out of hundreds detained is a farce.

Indeed they were combatants Subz--well not all of them, but many of them were captured in Afganistan during the actual fighting there. I know little about the rest of them and so cannot comment on them.

No one is surprised that these kangaroo courts were deemed illegal by the US Supreme Court. This should hopefully assist in the law suits Donald Rumsfeld, Bush and Dick Cheney are facing regarding the illegal detention and torture experienced by those detained in Gitmo.

I don't really have any of the facts pertaining to alleged torture being used in Gitmo. I have read articles stating that such was going on, but again, I just don't know enough yet to comment intelligently.

This War on Terror crud is starting to fray at the edges and im glad!

I don't know if it is fraying at the edges, but I'm sure getting tired of it.

In other news I hear that AIDS viruses are being detained as illegal pathogens in Camp Petri Dish. The Executive branch maintains its right, under war time powers (War on AIDS), to carry out any interogation tactics they wish including physical stress methods

Even if they come up with a cure we won't get to use it because of the illegal method in which it was obtained--it will be deemed inadmissible in hospitals.

[edit on 30-6-2006 by Astronomer70]