Categories

Archives

Habeas Corpus Is Now Dead

It appears as if habeas corpus, our most sacrosanct right, has been eviscerated by the court. So, tell me, will this court protect a woman’s right to choose now? I don’t think so. I mean, if they won’t protect a right that has been fundamental to Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence since, oh, the Magna Carta, why would a woman’s right matter much?

And so, that being the last reason to vote for Obama–you know, that he’ll appoint liberals to the court–explain to me how he is any different than Romney?

5 comments to Habeas Corpus Is Now Dead

  • steeleweed

    The coming battle will be the .1% with surveillance cameras and drones versus torches and pitchforks.
    And shotguns – skeet, anyone?

    Putting things in order always means getting other people under your control.
    - Denis Diderot

  • steeleweed

    is that all the real weapons will be in in the hands of NRA members, who are more likely to support tyranny and oppose it, being totally mindwashed.

    Putting things in order always means getting other people under your control.
    - Denis Diderot

  • Karl der Grosse

    but the Great Writ of Habeas corpus predates the Magna Carta. We are well and truly stuffed either way.

  • empireofdirt77

    Just to interrupt your Obama bad pity party, can you honestly tell me Scalia and his Agnus Dei hairshirt, conflicted Oreo Clarence Thomas, and Roberts who invented Citizens United by having it briefed again on point not even at issue to make it a more sweeping ruling make better choices than Sotomayor or the other lady justice Barry named or any of the neocon clowns Mittens would choose?

    Sheesh, y’all sound at times like that FL fool, just with different issues: http://empireofdirt77.blogspot.com/2012/06/putting-fl-in-positive-light-n-fl.html

  • Steve Hynd

    Adam Serwer:

    It only takes four votes to ensure a case gets heard. That means one of the four Democratic appointees on the court voted not to hear the detainee cases. As The American Prospect’s Scott Lemieux notes, why that happened will remain a subject of speculation: Either one of the four Democratic appointees fears that the Supreme Court might make the situation worse, or they concur with what the D.C. Circuit has done. Some other configuration of six “no votes” is also possible. The result is the same regardless: The decision means that the D.C. Circuit’s de-facto reversal of Boumediene will stand, leaving Gitmo detainees with very slim chances of securing their freedom by challenging their detention in court.

    The Obama administration shares some of the blame for this result. As a presidential candidate in 2008, then-Senator Barack Obama praised the Boumediene decision. Earlier this year, his administration urged the Supreme Court not to take the Gitmo detainees’ appeal, leaving in place legal standards that civil libertarians argue render Boumediene almost meaningless.

    Gitmo detainees have now lost virtually every avenue—other than dying in detention—for leaving the detention camp.

    Given that the youngest inmate is only 24 (he was detained aged 15), Gitmo could be open for a very long time indeed.

Leave a Reply