Guantanamo is a lawless enclave

[JoFerret]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=558&e=1&u=/ap/20040420/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_detainees


WASHINGTON - The United States has created a "lawless enclave" at a military base in Cuba where more than 600 men from 44 countries are being held without access to American courts, a lawyer for the men told the Supreme Court on Tuesday.

Attorney John Gibbons said "it's been plain for 215 years" that people in federal detention may file petitions in U.S. courts.


The prisoners in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, were mostly picked up in the fighting that toppled the Taliban government in Afghanistan (news - web sites) and Pakistan in the months following the Sept. 11 attacks.


Their appeal, the first major challenge arising from the U.S. war on terror to reach the high court, asks a basic legal question: Can foreign-born prisoners picked up overseas and held outside U.S. borders use American courts to try win their freedom?


Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist noted that the detainees are not on American soil, and asked how a judge in Washington is to deal with a case from Cuba.


Gibbons said the men should be treated just as prisoners in America are.


"No other law applies there. Cuban law doesn't apply there," he said.

<more>

[SpiralHawk]

1. Clang

"All your evil doers are belong to us." - BushCo

[Tansy_Gold]

2. okay, if it ain't Cuba and it ain't th US, it must be

MARS!!!!

sheesh.

I always thought all US facilities, no matter where they were, operated under US law. Embassies, military bases, etc.

of course, I could be wrong.

i'm only


Tansy Gold

[mouse7]

5. Exactly... same as embassy ground under international law

Neo-con Gitmo claims could set precedent that would allow China to tear down a US embassy gate and seize someone from US Embassy grounds.

[damnraddem]

8. No, an embassy is legitimate ...

Gitmo isn't. It is NOT U.S. soil. But U.S. law should apply to land occupied by U.S. troops, legitimate or not. Or alternatively, turn the matter over to the law of the country involved: 'Hey, Fidel, could we get your judges to rule on our detainees?'

[Vladimir]

9. Why not take the rethugs at their word?

It ain't US jurisdiction cos its in Cuba.
It ain't Cuban jurisdiction cos they are US detainees.

Now it seems to me that what follows from this is:

Hence the only applicable law is international law.

But that would fuck up all this indefinite detention business, wouldn't it? Hmmm....

V

[peacetalksforall]

3. Lawless by the numbers....

600 The number of men and youth being detained at Guantanamo.

44 The number of countries represented by detainees at G.

1200 The approximate number of days the longest held detainee at Guantanamo has been held within wire in the Western Hemisphere.

??? The number of citizen paid men and women who are guarding and taking care of detainees at Guantanamo.

??? The number of citizen tax dollars that are being spent to guard and take care of detainees at Guantanamo.

??? The number of lawyers who are attempting to allow legal representation for the detainees at Guantanamo.

??? The number of citizen paid military and administration officials who created this prison at Guantanamo and attempt to insist that these men and youth not be defended.

??? The number of citizen paid dollars required to fight citizen paid military and administration officials about legal representation.

6?? The number of detainees at Guantanamo who have been released.

3 The number of teenage detainees at Guantanamo who said they liked their life there.

[peterh]

4. Although my hopes aren’t high for a “judicious” decision here….

I do think it’ll be a 5-4 decision…O’Conner will again be in the swing…

If by chance the Feds were to lose, I wouldn’t be surprised to see a lot of detainees transferred to the new prisons on Diego Garcia and Kabul….this cabal isn’t about to let trivial things like US Law get in it’s way…


Although it isn't clear how the court might ultimately rule, a majority of
justices expressed misgivings about the U.S. government's position that
terrorism suspects at Guantanamo Bay have no rights to federal court hearings.
"Why isn't this like a federal enclave within a state?" asked Justice Ruth
Bader Ginsburg, who also pointed out the U.S. has been operating the Guantanamo
Bay naval base under American laws for a century.

[damnraddem]

6. I say, let Cuban law apply.

Turn them all over to the Cuban courts. Then remove the base from Cuban soil.

[peterh]

7. Yikes!! Scalia must’ve been one abused child growing up…

I’m assuming Scalia assumes the habeus statute as restrictive rather than all encompassing….this man is evil….



"It seems contrary to the
Constitution that the executive branch can do whatever it wants," Justice Breyer
said.

Justice Antonin Scalia openly criticized the remarks of Justice Breyer during
the argument, calling Breyer's argument for court intervention for the detainees
a "reticulated system" that should be developed by Congress rather than the
courts. "If the people think it is unfair," Scalia said, then Congress can "with
the stroke of a pen change the habeus statute."
Habeus Corpus is developed law that gives prisoners the right to challenge the
legality of their imprisonment. And it is the law the detainees are citing in
their appeal.

[gottaB]

10. another thing Congress could do is Impeach the bum

He's taunting us.