Appeals Court: Bush Can't Hold US Citizen
The president of the United States does not have the power to detain an American citizen seized on U.S. soil as an enemy combatant, a federal appeals court ruled on Thursday, in a serious setback to the bush administration's war on terror....
The U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 ruling, said only the U.S. Congress can authorize such detentions and it ordered the government to release Jose Padilla from military custody within 30 days.
The court said that the government can transfer Padilla, a U.S. citizen who has been held incommunicado in a Navy prison, to a civilian authority that can bring criminal charges against him.
"Presidential authority does not exist in a vacuum and this case involves not whether those responsibilities should be aggressively pursued, but whether the President is obligated in the circumstances presented here to share them with Congress," the court said.
"Where, as here, the President's power as Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces and the domestic rule of law intersect, we conclude that clear congressional authorization is required for detentions of Americans on American soil...."
Matt's Chat
I had a problem with this from the beginning. I'm sure this will find its way to the Supreme Court, but I'm not sure that is the best thing to do.One of the advantages of being a citizen, even if a disloyal one, is our access to the judicial system afforded to citizens by the Constitution. While I agree that the administration must take extraordinary action in the war against terror, I don't believe that Americans should have their right to the judicial process taken away. At least not until after the guilt of the party in question has been established. If Padilla said, "Yeah, I did it. Sue me." then I'm all in. But he hasn't done that (to my knowledge) so I can't support stripping an American citizen of his right to due process.
Bring on the heat, guys...
Mark's Remarks
Matt, on this issue, we disagree. In critical times, Americans have historically been held indefinately as enemy combatants, and has been justified. Look at Lincoln during the Civil War and Habeus Corpus. To me, if you join the other side you give up your rights as citizens. However, I do think the Bush Administration made a tactical error. If they wanted to guarantee that they could hold people indefinately, then what they should have done was go to Congress and get a declaration of war. Our Constitution does give the executive the power to hold people in that situation as enemy combatants. That, I think, was the mistake. Then these people could have been tried before military tribunals, etc., who would have determined whether or not they could be bonded over for trial, etc. However, instead the administration tried to play both ways. That, unfortunately, never works.
