A Bad Compromise
by TChris
The compromise between three Republican senators and the Bush administration over language in legislation governing the interrogation and trial of detainees turned back the worst of the administration's intentions, but that is no reason for the bill to win the support of any Democrat -- or, for that matter, any Republican who cares about justice. When the executive branch acts both as prosecutor and as judge and jury, the only safeguard against a sham proceeding is judicial review. If a court cannot perform the limited function that habeas corpus provides -- assuring that the proceeding comported with the Constitution and laws of the United States -- the executive branch will be given the unreviewable power to imprison the innocent indefinitely.
There are other flaws in the compromise, but its prohibition of judicial review is enough to earn a filibuster. Preserving the role of the judicial branch and the right to due process and habeas corpus should be the default position of Democrats, but there's no reason to expect even a majority of elected Democrats in the Senate or House to fight for the Constitution. Too many Democrats during the Bush years have displayed their unwillingness to stand up for first principles, at risk of being labeled "soft on terror." How sad it is that politicians don't fear being labeled "soft on human rights" or "soft on the Constitution."
< And You Thought McCarthyism Was Dead | Bill Clinton on Osama: The Fox Video > |