Supreme Court Blocks Bush, Gitmo War Trials

Salim Ahmed Hamdan is seen in this undated file photo. The former driver for Osama bin Laden may help decide the fate of dozens of Guantanamo Bay detainees, and perhaps all of them, as the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to rule on his legal challenge to the first American war-crimes trials since World War II. The court, which is expected to rule as early as Monday, June 26, 2006, is considering a range of issues in detainee Salim Ahmed Hamdan's case, including whether President George W. Bush had the authority to order military trials for men who were captured in the war on terror and sent to Guantanamo Bay Naval base in Cuba. (AP Photo/photo courtesy of Prof. Neal Katyal) (AP)

The president also has told reporters, "I'd like to close Guantanamo." But he added, "I also recognize that we're holding some people that are darn dangerous."

The court's ruling says nothing about whether the prison should be shut down, dealing only with plans to put detainees on trial.

"Trial by military commission raises separation-of-powers concerns of the highest order," Kennedy wrote in his opinion. "Concentration of power (in the executive branch) puts personal liberty in peril of arbitrary action by officials, an incursion the Constitution's three-part system is designed to avoid."

The prison at Guantanamo Bay, erected in the months after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks on the United States, has been a flash point for international criticism. Hundreds of people suspected of ties to al-Qaida and the Taliban _ including some teenagers _ had been swept up by the U.S. military and secretly shipped there since 2002.

Three detainees committed suicide there this month, using sheets and clothing to hang themselves. The deaths brought new scrutiny and criticism of the prison, along with fresh calls for its closing.

Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a strongly worded dissent from Thursday's ruling and took the unusual step of reading part of it from the bench _ something he had never done before in his 15 years. He said the court's decision would "sorely hamper the president's ability to confront and defeat a new and deadly enemy."

The court's willingness, Thomas wrote in the dissent, "to second-guess the determination of the political branches that these conspirators must be brought to justice is both unprecedented and dangerous."

Justices Antonin Scalia and Samuel Alito also dissented.

In his own opinion, Justice Stephen Breyer said, "Congress has not issued the executive a 'blank check.'"

"Indeed, Congress has denied the president the legislative authority to create military commissions of the kind at issue here. Nothing prevents the president from returning to Congress to seek the authority he believes necessary," Breyer wrote.

Justices also rejected the Bush administration's claim that the case should be thrown out on grounds that a new law stripped the court's authority to consider it, and that Hamdan should not have been allowed to appeal until after the conclusion of his trial.

The court said the law passed last year to limit lawsuits by Guantanamo detainees does not apply to pending cases like the one brought by Hamdan.

"It's certainly a nail in the coffin for the idea that the president can set up these trials," said Barbara Olshansky, legal director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, which represents about 300 Guantanamo detainees.

Hamdan has claimed he is innocent and worked as a driver for bin Laden in Afghanistan only to eke out a living for his family.

Stevens suggested that the administration would be best off trying Hamdan and others before regular military courts-martial trials.

The case is Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 05-184.

___

On the Net:

Supreme Court: http://www.supremecourtus.gov/