UPDATE: So it's Roberts, hand-picked by Bush for his current position on the D.C. Court of Appeals. Most recently he made the news last Friday by chiming in with that insufferable prick A. Raymond Randolph to uphold the decision that the military commission set up to try "enemy combatants" was constitutionally legal, in the case of Salim Ahmed Hamdan, a driver for bin Laden accused of war crimes:
"The court said it was well established that the Geneva Conventions "do not create judicially enforceable rights" - that is, accusations of a violation may not be brought in a lawsuit.Even allowing for the usual lawyerly exaggeration indulged in by defense attorneys, Hamdin's attorney's take on it sounds pretty close to the bone:
The appeals panel also held that Judge Robertson (the lower court) had been incorrect in maintaining that Congress had not authorized Mr. Bush to set up the commissions. Congress gave him the authority to do so, the panel said, in three resolutions dealing with terrorism. In one, the lawmakers authorized the president "to use all necessary and appropriate force" against anyone who had abetted the Sept. 11 attacks, and granted him the authority to act to prevent international acts of terrorism.
In addition, the appeals court said the commissions were not bound by the rules of courts-martial, like allowing for defendants to be present at all times."
""Today's ruling," Mr. Katyal said, "places absolute trust in the president, unchecked by the Constitution, statutes of Congress and longstanding treaties ratified by the Senate of the United States.""To me as well, the ruling said that Bush had been empowered by Congress and the Constitution to do pretty much as he damned well pleased. And there's no one with whom I'd prefer NOT to entrust unchecked power over the country than that morally-challenged infant in the Oval Office.
This is who Bush wants to appoint for a lifetime of Constitutional rulings. Well, you knew it wasn't going to be Felix Frankfurter.
No comments:
Post a Comment