Supreme Court declines to hear torture suit by former UK Gitmo detainees

[EmeraldCityGrl]

Source: WW4 Report

The US Supreme Court on Dec. 14 declined to hear a lawsuit by four UK citizens and former Guantánamo Bay detainees against former US defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld and other military officials. The Court denied certiorari in Rasul v. Myers, leaving in tact a ruling by the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit.

The appeals court had affirmed in part a district court decision dismissing illegal detention and mistreatment charges under the Alien Tort Statute, the Geneva Conventions, and the Fifth and Eighth Amendments of the US Constitution against Rumsfeld and other military officials, and reversed the lower court's decision to reject a motion for dismissal of two additional charges against the defendants. The appeals court ruling came after the Supreme Court vacated and remanded to the district court the DC Circuit's 2008 decision in the same case, which also dismissed the lawsuit against Rumsfeld and the other defendants.

UK citizens Shafiq Rasul, Asif Iqbal, Rhuhel Ahmed, and Jamal Al-Harith were released from Guantánamo in March 2004. In May 2004, Rasul and Iqbal said in an open letter to then-US president George W. Bush that they had suffered abuse at Guantanamo similar to that perpetrated at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. The Center for Constitutional Rights filed a lawsuit on their behalf in October 2004 against Rumsfeld, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Richard Meyers, and others alleging "deliberate and foreseeable action taken ... to flout or evade the United States Constitution, federal statutory law, United States treaty obligations and long established norms of customary international law." (Jurist, Dec. 14)

Read more: http://www.ww4report.com/node/8064

---

Rumsfeld remains an untouchable. I'm losing hope anyone in the Bush regime will be held accountable by the American judicial system for war crimes.

[buckrogers1965]

1. Ridiculous

This is a travesty.

We kidnapped innocent people, tortured them, and then held them for years without any judicial review.

They deserve to have their case heard in court.

The constitution says "people" not "citizen."

If they can treat terrorists like they are less than animals, then all they have to do is accuse you of being a supporter of terrorists and do the same to you.

[RobinA]

7. But With Cert Denied

we have no real way of knowing why. It could have been some technicality, a procedural issue. Jurisdiction? Standing? What's the proper forum for a Geneva Convention violation? Can UK citizens file US Consitution claims?

[ima_sinnic]

2. k&r for the truth--let everybody see the kind of cockroaches we have "running things" (nt)

[Mithreal]

3. They are the Bush Crime Family.

We are not going to get them on the big stuff. We seemingly have to depend on foreign courts for justice.

Deals have been cut by the Dems or President Obama and the Dems have already committed and intend to commit further war crimes as well. I am sure there are many other possibilities but I do not buy the let's just let bygones be bygones and focus on the road ahead gotta worry about the President's agenda excuse/rationalization.

[defendandprotect]

4. Shameful . . . !!!

[ima_sinnic]

5. kicking for more exposure

criminals always protect their own

[EmeraldCityGrl]

6. Thanks. I find it even more nteresting

that ths s not beng reported by any other news agency, mainstream or otherwise. This gives a clear picture of what we're up against.