meta-roj

This site is currently broken

Friday, December 19, 2003

two courts finally check the bush administration

in a 2-to-1 decision, the us court of appeals for the 2nd circuit in new york ordered that jose padilla be released from military custody. perhaps less reported, but more interesting to me, even the dissenting judge in this case agreed that padilla must have access to counsel.

“Let’s remember,” [White House press secretary Scott] McClellan said, “we’re talking about an individual who was involved in seeking to do harm to the American people. And the president has repeatedly said that his most solemn obligation . . . is to protect the American people.”

let us also remember, that we are talking about an individual who is guaranteed the protection of law, and is, in matters of law, innocent until proven guilty. then consider the potential bias introduced into legal proceedings when the white house press secretary affirms the guilt of a suspect in public statements. nothing new in this administration, ashcroft set the precedent.

also yesterday, and also a 2-to-1 decision, the us court of appeals for the 9th circuit in san francisco ruled that detainees held as enemy combatants at guantanamo bay also get lawyers and fall under the jurisdiction of us courts.

both, of course, will be appealed by the bush administration, and both are being spun by the white house as bad decisions. i hope the next round results in a more dramatic rebuke, but my observation of the supreme court of late suggests that is unlikely. for now, anyway, there’s a little life left in the old constitution…

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

posted by roj at 5:25 am