Time and again, it’s the ‘strict constructionists’ that want to plat games with the constitution; actively working to create exceptions for this situation or that. From successful efforts to do amazingly activist things like the Bush v. Gore decision (only case that can’t be used as precedent!!) to their attempts to create a space for the President to ignore the Constitution under certain circumstances. Attempts like this failed one:
From Salon:
Thursday, June 12, 2008 10:48 EDT
Supreme Court rules in favor of Guantánamo detaineesby Alex Koppelman
Thursday, June 12, 2008 10:48 EDT
Supreme Court rules in favor of Guantánamo detaineesIn a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled Thursday that detainees held at Guantánamo Bay have the right to challenge their detention in U.S. civilian courts.
This is the third time that the court has ruled this way in a case about the legal rights of Guantánamo detainees; each ruling was a setback for the Bush administration. After the two previous rulings, Congress and the administration instituted new procedures for the trial of detainees, but this latest ruling says the current iteration of those procedures is inadequate.
Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the majority opinion, and was joined in the decision by Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, David Souter and John Paul Stevens. “The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times,” Kennedy wrote.
The court’s conservative wing — Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas — dissented from Kennedy’s opinion.
“The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times.”
Strict Constructionists indeed.
