home

Supreme Court Won't Hear Detainees' Challenge to Military Commissions

By Jeralyn, Section Terror Detainees
Posted on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 11:21:13 AM EST
Tags: Guantanamo, Military Commissions (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

The Supreme Court today refused to hear the cases of Salim Ahmed Hamdan and Omar Khadr, challenging the legality of the military tribunals under which they are to be tried.

Justices David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer would have granted the request to hear the case, the court said in turning it down. It takes four votes, though, to hear a case.

The court's action follows its April 2 decision not to step into related aspects of the legal battle regarding other Guantanamo Bay detainees. The issue there is whether the prisoners may go to federal court to challenge their confinement.

< Clueless: Richardson on Roe and Justice White | Supreme Court Grants Cert in Texas Death Case >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Supreme Court Won't Hear Detainees' Challenge to Military Commissions | 3 comments (3 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Justice Stevens (none / 0) (#1)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 11:25:10 AM EST
    in his earlier statement explained that he believes the case would be ripe after exhausting the process.

    BTD right and AP incorrect (none / 0) (#2)
    by Gabriel Malor on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 11:49:25 AM EST
    First, I suspect that BTD is correct about waiting to see how the Commissions work. In Justice Kennedy's concurring opinion in Hamdan, he wrote about holding off on pronouncing the fitness of the military proceedings until it appeared that they had actually prejudiced Hamdan. I'm sure he'll join Justices Ginsburg, Souter, and Breyer in granting certiorari if that comes to be.

    Second, the AP report is wrong in one significant respect. I suspect it is because the writer isn't used to dealing with the subtleties of plurality opinions. The report claims:

    In its 2006 decision, the Supreme Court said Hamdan could invoke rights secured by the Geneva Conventions. Yet the new Military Commissions Act states that no one subject to such trials "may invoke Geneva Conventions as a source of rights," lawyers for Hamdan and Khadr noted in court papers

    This is incorrect. Justice Kennedy did not concur in the portion of the plurality opinion that would have granted the right to claim such rights. (See here for Kennedy's concurrence.) That portion of Justice Stevens' opinion was a 4-4 vote and is therefore not binding on the lower courts.

    I'm really sick of this supreme court! (none / 0) (#3)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 12:40:56 PM EST


    Supreme Court Won't Hear Detainees' Challenge to Military Commissions | 3 comments (3 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment