Hacks With Robes

by Steve Soto

A good example of what happens when you put politicians on the highest court instead of judges took place today, when a closely-divided the Supreme Court ruled that Guantanamo terrorism detainees had a right to a hearing in United States civilian courts.

In its third rebuke of the Bush administration's treatment of prisoners, the court ruled 5-4 that the government is violating the rights of prisoners being held indefinitely and without charges at the U.S. naval base in Cuba. The court's liberal justices were in the majority.

At issue was whether or not these suspects have been denied basic rights, among them the right to a speedy trial, since many of them have been held by the Bush Administration for years without being charged with crimes or allowed to challenge the evidence against them.

And yet the far right minority installed by the Bushes tosses aside the basic questions before the court to maintain that indefinite detention without being allowed to confront their accusers and the case against them is just fine so long as the country is at war with Islamists.

In dissent, Chief Justice John Roberts criticized his colleagues for striking down what he called "the most generous set of procedural protections ever afforded aliens detained by this country as enemy combatants."

Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas also dissented.

Scalia said the nation is "at war with radical Islamists" and that the court's decision "will make the war harder on us. It will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed."

Going six years without a hearing constitutes "the most generous set of procedural protections ever afforded aliens detained by this country as enemy combatants"? This is the legal rocket scientist the Senate confirmed as Chief Justice? And forcing the government to bring these people to trial and prove their case will cause more Americans to be killed? Funny, the Clinton Administration had no problem prosecuting and convicting the 1993 WTC bombers. So why was Janet Reno so much better at her job than any of the Bush-league AGs?

As I said, the conservative minority in this case are not acting as guardians of the law, but rather as political hacks. But then we knew that all the way back to Bush V. Gore, didn't we?

Update: McCain has no problem with Scalia's sad flip-flopping on strict constructionism.