Thursday, June 12, 2008

Habeas Rights?

The Supremes, in flagrante dilecto, have stretched our constitution beyond what was intended by the framers to confer habeas corpus rights to illegal foreign combatants being held in the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. SCOTUSblog calls Justice Kennedy's majority opinion a "rhapsodic review of the history of the Great Writ," specifically his treatment of the Suspension clause:
The Suspension Clause, he wrote, “protects the rights of the detained by a means consistent with the essential design of the Constitution. It ensures that except during periods of formal suspension, the writ, to maintain the ‘delicate balance of governance’ that is itself the surest safeguard of liberty.”

Liberty for whom? The murderous thugs at Guantanamo (I do not mean the U.S. military, in case there is some confusion) are not subject to our laws. Our Supreme court is conferring rights where there should not be any. Mark Levin writes at NRO:
It has been the objective of the left-wing bar to fight aspects of this war in our courtrooms, where it knew it would have a decent chance at victory. So complete is the Court's disregard for the Constitution and even its own precedent now that anything is possible. And what was once considered inconceivable is now compelled by the Constitution, or so five justices have ruled. I fear for my country. I really do. And AP, among others, reports this story as a defeat for "the Bush administration." Really? I see it as a defeat for the nation.

The constitution is for the protection of the rights of American citizens. The preamble begins with "We the People of the United States," not "Whomever fashion dictates." This is activist judicial tyranny. As Mark Levin says, Why do the leftists hate my country?

No comments: