Fri Mar 16, 2012, 08:35 PM

kpete (38,893 posts)

DOJ Wants American Contractor's Torture Suit Against Rumsfeld Dismissed

Source: Legal Times

DOJ Wants American Contractor's Torture Suit Against Rumsfeld Dismissed

The Justice Department is urging a federal appeals court in Washington to strike down a ruling that said former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld can be held personally liable for the alleged torture of an American contractor detained in military custody in Iraq.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit will hear the case, Doe v. Rumsfeld, on Monday morning. DOJ lawyers said in court papers that the suit impermissibly intrudes on foreign detention policy and conduct in a combat zone.

The government wants the appeals court panel to overturn a ruling from U.S. District Judge James Gwin, who said last August that the suit can proceeding in Washington's federal trial court. Gwin rejected the government's effort to dismiss the litigation.

DOJ Civil Division attorney Henry Whitaker, who will argue for Rumsfeld, said in a brief that Congress has not crated a damages action for detainees who allege they were injured or abused in military custody.

Read more: http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2012/03/doj-wants-american-contractors-torture-suit-against-rumsfeld-dismissed.html

56 replies, 4876 views

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

56 replies	Author	Time	Post
DOJ Wants American Contractor's Torture Suit Against Rumsfeld Dismissed (Original post)	kpete	Mar 2012	OP
The Justice Department should change it's name to	Autumn	Mar 2012	#1
Dept of Joke nm	rhett o rick	Mar 2012	#4
The Dept of Injustice want's to punish all those dangerous Pot	crunch60	Mar 2012	#18
Department of	_ed_	Mar 2012	#24
Yet another war crime for the United States government	saras	Mar 2012	#2
+1	CrispyQ	Mar 2012	#3
It's the Dept of 'Let's be sure to cover each other's asses, dept' nm	rhett o rick	Mar 2012	#5
I'd like to blame Bush - but that this is all on Holder. There is just no difference anymore.	24601	Mar 2012	#7
Its his job to defend the US in such cases not roll over and play dead.	cstanleytech	Mar 2012	#13
But it is NOT Congress' job to prosecute war crimes, it is clearly the DOJ's job ..	99th_Monkey	Mar 2012	#16
The problem is though that they (congress and the senate) are passing laws and such to curb	cstanleytech	Mar 2012	#21
Exactly	loyalsister	Mar 2012	#22
The problem with the "Pandora's Box" argument is that just because	rhett o rick	Mar 2012	#23
That's a red herring	_ed_	Mar 2012	#25
They got the birth certificate thing in front of a judge	loyalsister	Mar 2012	#38
We shouldn't prosecute criminals	Aerows	Mar 2012	#28
I may not have made my point clearly	loyalsister	Mar 2012	#29
So you want to prosecute Bush Chenney and Rummy for torture, war crimes and all the	Vincardog	Mar 2012	#30
That brings us back to congress and the senate since they vote on the laws.	cstanleytech	Mar 2012	#32
The DOJ should be prosecuting the crimes, or the world court will.	Vincardog	Mar 2012	#33
Seeing as the world court hasnt done anything about it as of today I doubt we will see them	cstanleytech	Mar 2012	#35
I am curious. Do you think that is a good thing?	Vincardog	Mar 2012	#36
That Bush and Cheney will never be held accountable? No, its not a good thing.	cstanleytech	Mar 2012	#39
Then what do you propose?	kenfrequed	Mar 2012	#49
What do I think should be done?	cstanleytech	Mar 2012	#50
Would a prosecution be successful?	loyalsister	Mar 2012	#37
Would a prosecution be successful? Considering the fact that the perps have admitted on air and in	Vincardog	Mar 2012	#41
I'm on the thumping my head on the table over them still not being charged side.	cstanleytech	Mar 2012	#45
logic	loyalsister	Mar 2012	#46
You don't think that requiring this president and all future presidents to abide by the rule of law	Vincardog	Mar 2012	#48
What are you referring to, purjury or bombing Serbia?	24601	Mar 2012	#51
Take your pick	loyalsister	Mar 2012	#52
How would Kennedy invoke an amendment that wasn't adopted for more than three years after his	24601	Mar 2012	#54
No, if Holder thought it was indefensible, he wouldn't defend it. He already showed that with DOMA.	24601	Apr 2012	#55
Necro much ?	cstanleytech	Apr 2012	#56
Sometines the DOJ judgements are aOK....	Harriety	Mar 2012	#6
Yep, still looking forward.	SammyWinstonJack	Mar 2012	#8
Spam deleted by one_voice (MIR Team)	fdherh	Mar 2012	#9
The DOJ should be PROSECUTING this case.	sabrina 1	Mar 2012	#10
I agree!	burrowowl	Mar 2012	#17
The DOJ is in essence the lawyer for the government so they can hardly prosecute the case.	cstanleytech	Mar 2012	#40
The transition deal: "We Dems won't prosecute you war criminal Repugs and in return, we get....?"	wordpix	Mar 2012	#44
USDOJ: We don't prosecute criminals only whistleblowers.	Dont call me Shirley	Mar 2012	#11
DOj	guss	Mar 2012	#12
K&R	Solly Mack	Mar 2012	#14
K&R	jannyk	Mar 2012	#15
This is what happens when you let a politicized DoJ remain.	OnyxCollie	Mar 2012	#19
Kicked and recommended.	Uncle Joe	Mar 2012	#20
Is Bush still in office?	_ed_	Mar 2012	#26
"impermissibly" Hmm. They didn't ask OUR permission to do what they did.	Festivito	Mar 2012	#27
Holdering on by a thread!	RUMMYisFROSTED	Mar 2012	#31
The more things "change"...	Zhade	Mar 2012	#34
this is not Justice ...Justice Department	lovuian	Mar 2012	#42
"It would put all actions of any military official beyond the scope of judicial review"	wordpix	Mar 2012	#43
Rumsfeld is not off the hook	Rosa Luxemburg	Mar 2012	#47
k & r! nt	wildbilln864	Mar 2012	#53

Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 08:45 PM

Autumn (11,297 posts)

1. The Justice Department should change it's name to

The What a Fucking Joke Department.

DOJ Wants American Contractor's Torture Suit Against Rumsfeld Dismissed

1. The Justice Department should change it's name to

4. Dept of Joke nm

18. The Dept of Injustice want's to punish all those dangerous Pot

24. Department of

2. Yet another war crime for the United States government

3. +1

5. It's the Dept of 'Let's be sure to cover each other's asses, dept' nm

7. I'd like to blame Bush - but that this is all on Holder. There is just no difference anymore.

13. Its his job to defend the US in such cases not roll over and play dead.

16. But it is NOT Congress' job to prosecute war crimes, it is clearly the DOJ's job ..

21. The problem is though that they (congress and the senate) are passing laws and such to curb

22. Exactly

23. The problem with the "Pandora's Box" argument is that just because

25. That's a red herring

38. They got the birth certificate thing in front of a judge

28. We shouldn't prosecute criminals

29. I may not have made my point clearly

30. So you want to prosecute Bush Chenney and Rummy for torture, war crimes and all the

32. That brings us back to congress and the senate since they vote on the laws.

33. The DOJ should be prosecuting the crimes, or the world court will.

35. Seeing as the world court hasnt done anything about it as of today I doubt we will see them

36. I am curious. Do you think that is a good thing?

39. That Bush and Cheney will never be held accountable? No, its not a good thing.

49. Then what do you propose?

50. What do I think should be done?

37. Would a prosecution be successful?

41. Would a prosecution be successful? Considering the fact that the perps have admitted on air and in

45. I'm on the thumping my head on the table over them still not being charged side.

46. logic

48. You don't think that requiring this president and all future presidents to abide by the rule of law

51. What are you referring to, purjury or bombing Serbia?

52. Take your pick

54. How would Kennedy invoke an amendment that wasn't adopted for more than three years after his

55. No, if Holder thought it was indefensible, he wouldn't defend it. He already showed that with DOMA.

56. Necro much ?

6. Sometines the DOJ judgements are aOK....

8. Yep, still looking forward.

9. Spam deleted by one_voice (MIR Team)

10. The DOJ should be PROSECUTING this case.

17. I agree!

40. The DOJ is in essence the lawyer for the government so they can hardly prosecute the case.

44. The transition deal: "We Dems won't prosecute you war criminal Repugs and in return, we get....?"

11. USDOJ: We don't prosecute criminals only whistleblowers.

12. DOj

14. K&R

15. K&R

19. This is what happens when you let a politicized DoJ remain.

20. Kicked and recommended.

26. Is Bush still in office?

27. "impermissibly" Hmm. They didn't ask OUR permission to do what they did.

31. Holdering on by a thread!

34. The more things "change"...

42. this is not Justice ...Justice Department

43. "It would put all actions of any military official beyond the scope of judicial review"

47. Rumsfeld is not off the hook

53. k & r! nt