Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Rasul V Rumsfeld Decision

http://washingtonindependent.com/70887/supreme-court-shuts-door-on-gitmo-torture-case

After hearing passionate arguments from the Obama Administration, the Supreme Court acquiesced to the president’s fervent request and, in a one-line ruling, let stand a lower court decision that declared torture an ordinary, expected consequence of military detention, while introducing a shocking new precedent for all future courts to follow: anyone who is arbitrarily declared a “suspected enemy combatant” by the president or his designated minions is no longer a “person.” They will simply cease to exist as a legal entity. They will have no inherent rights, no human rights, no legal standing whatsoever — save whatever modicum of process the government arbitrarily deigns to grant them from time to time, with its ever-shifting tribunals and show trials. (More at link)

Answer Question
 
Anonymous

Asked by Anonymous at 11:36 AM on Dec. 21, 2009 in Politics & Current Events

Answers (15)
  • This is a complicated case. I don't believe in torture. I don't believe it works, it doesn't get us valuable information. I don't believe the stripping of someone's personhood by the mere granting of the title 'suspected enemy combatant' is good for America, or the world. I don't believe the United States military should ever be exempt from the laws of the land it protects. And it sickens me, positively sickens me, that this administration, headed by a constitutional lawyer, can justify the kind of legal wrangling required to eviscerate the document that protects all of us, American and otherwise, from tyranny and abuse.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 11:40 AM on Dec. 21, 2009

  • This wasn't Obama's decision
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 11:43 AM on Dec. 21, 2009

  • clapping

    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 11:43 AM on Dec. 21, 2009

  • From your link, It has nothing to do with this admin

    The Supreme Court dealt a harsh blow on Monday to victims of abuse by U.S. officials during the “war on terror.” The court announced it would not review a federal appeals court ruling that dismissed a lawsuit by four British citizens who claim they were wrongly arrested, detained and mistreated by American officials at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., had ruled in April that government officials were entitled to “qualified immunity” from suit because it wasn’t clear at the time that abusing Guantanamo prisoners at was illegal.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 11:51 AM on Dec. 21, 2009

  • Im well aware of seperation of powers. However, the administrations attorneys argued on behalf of the president against the court reviewing the case, and in the lower court case, as it was the federal government named as the defendant. As was shown during the Bush administration, White House attorneys and the President often discuss these matters (IE the torture memos) and I would be extremely shocked to find out that our president was not appraised of the situation, just as I would be to learn that the constitutional attorney heading our government didn't have a hand in crafting the arguments. Let's be realistic here. No one said it was 'Obama's decision'.

    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 11:55 AM on Dec. 21, 2009

  • White House attorneys and the President often discuss these matters (IE the torture memos) and I would be extremely shocked to find out that our president was not appraised of the situation


    So you are speculating , you don't know. this decision was laready made, they just refused to hear it again

    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 11:57 AM on Dec. 21, 2009

  • Oh, don't lose heart ... the circus-trial about to take place in New York City will serve the agenda of liberals who deny the existence of evil, who actually find fault with treating the perpetrator of a crime as a criminal, and someone bent on explosive destruction as an actual enemy. During this trial, the proud terrorists will be handed a microphone to broadcast whatever they wish to the entire world via satellite.

    (I don't think they'll take seriously their oath to "tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth". And considering that children in Gaza are taught - and believe - that Israelis make cookies with the blood of Palestinian children, these men's proclamations will likely be damning as well as false.)

    This will provide ample opportunity for certain idealogues (progressives, liberals, confused America-haters, are all labels that get used) to create public humiliation of the U.S.
    waldorfmom

    Answer by waldorfmom at 2:55 PM on Dec. 21, 2009

  • you rock        SUPREME COURT!


     


    MILITARY TROOPS, now you can get back to keeping us safe!!          way to go   There are a few people left with some sense!

    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 3:12 PM on Dec. 21, 2009

  • The motion of discovery is the most dangerous part of trying these terrorists in civilian courts,
    Carpy

    Answer by Carpy at 6:21 PM on Dec. 21, 2009

  • And in reply to the post. I say HELL YA!!!
    Carpy

    Answer by Carpy at 6:22 PM on Dec. 21, 2009

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.