Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Fourth Circuit to Reconsider Case of "Enemy Combatant" al-Marri: Why the Administration is So Scared

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-24-07 09:20 AM
Original message
Fourth Circuit to Reconsider Case of "Enemy Combatant" al-Marri: Why the Administration is So Scared
Fourth Circuit to Reconsider Case of "Enemy Combatant" al-Marri: Why the Administration is So Scared
by Jesselyn Radack
Fri Aug 24, 2007 at 05:28:31 AM PDT

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, the most conservative appeallate court in the country, will reconsider its stinging panel decision that slammed the Bush Administration for continuing to detain "enemy combatant" Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri indefinitely without charge.
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/nation_world/20070824_Court_will_reconsider_its_ruling_on_detainee.html

Even though the decision has limited or nonexistent practical consequence -- it benefits only those who are both under the direction of an enemy nation and living legally in the U.S. (a non-existent class according to the Department of Homeland Security -- the Fourth Circuit has now agreed to en banc review (by the full 10-member court) of the 2 to 1 ruling the panel made. Why? Because the decision looks to treaty obligations under the Hague and Geneva Conventions and recognizes that the Administration's arguments run directly contrary to the Constitution, as interpreted through "two centuries of growth and struggle, peace and war. . ."

...................

Why is the Administration so worried? Because the Fourth Circuit's al-Marri decision looks not only to law-of-war principles, but also (gasp!) to treaty obligations under the Hague and Geneva Conventions and related principles of customary international law. The opinion thus draws a line between "combatants" (members of a nation's military, militia, or other armed forces, and those who fight alongside them) and "civilians" (all other persons). And it notes that al-Marri's detention was neither the "classic wartime detention" the government claimed had rendered Hamdi an enemy combatant, nor the "classic battlefield detention" the government claimed had rendered Padilla an enemy combatant.

more at:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/8/24/75536/0644
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-24-07 09:22 AM
Response to Original message
1. Better Late Than Never
And better before Iran glows in the dark...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 07:51 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC