There is a new heated showdown between the Bush administration and the federal courts. An appellate court blocked the administration from transferring dirty-bomb suspect Jose Padilla (in photo) from a military brig to civil custody, so the administration asked the U.S. Supreme Court last week to intervene and allow the immediate transfer, The New York Times reported. What was particularly interesting was that the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which is known for being conservative and friendly to the administration’s actions, was so caustic in opposing the transfer, accusing the administration of trying to manipulate the court system. Bush’s solicitor general is arguing that the 4th Circuit does not have the authority to “disregard a presidential directive.”
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
19 Comments
Outlander and others,
So, hear the canary yet, singing of the unchecked expansion of Presidential power and the contraction of Legislative and Judicial powers? Hear it? Hear it?
If you claim not to, don’t be surprised when I call you a neofascist.
Happy New Year, btw.
Oh my, that sounds serious!
CF, have we forgotten which way the SC leans? I’m betting Bush gets his way. He has so far.
Paxton,
The ‘canary’ was a reference to the running skirmish between Outlander and me upthread. All kidding aside, I think it is deadly serious. We either have a Constitution that prescribes separate checks and balances, or a monarch. Bush obviously prefers the latter. Anyone who wants to call him or herself an American has no choice but to prefer the former.
As for the SCOTUS on the Padilla case, my sense is they’d be loath to overturn the 4th Circuit’s ruling, since SCOTUS rulings tend to defer to Circuit court rulings. My prediction: the SCOTUS won’t elect to hear the case, and will let the lower court ruling stand.
I’ll take that bet, Paxton. I agree this SC shamelessly defers to Executive Power most of the time, but they’d have to ignore their own decision in the Hamdi case to side with the Bushies on this one. And, however John Roberts turns out, I can’t see him becoming more fascist than Rehnquist was.
The Bushies knew they were going to get spanked. That’s why they tried to tranfer Padilla to criminal court. They may be right on the narrow legal point–refusing to transfer a prisoner when his lawyer agrees is problematic–but they can’t win on their former argument, particularly after abandoning every last allegation they had used.
Okay, I’ll qualify: It’s possible Supremes will use the transfer issue to duck hearing the larger one. More likely than not, I suppose.
Rage, Think this one will bring-out my usual detractors?
I like the one: Just sign your name so we don’t have to read it.
I think it is sighed?
Rage,You need only look at the recient history of the Supreme Court to see where this is going (2000, anyone?). The court and the nation are becoming more conservative and I’m not convinced that’s such a bad thing. A more centerist approach would be ideal, but that probably wont happen considering the polarization of American politics and the current administration’s attempts to pack the court with conservative jurists.Still, there’s no question that Padilla is a source of embarrasment for the government. Let’s hope that the Fourth Circuit decision brings the attention and daylight this case so richly deserves.
More
Five years ago I saw blueprints for two oil pipeline running from Iraq through Syria to Israel. I thought at that time that that was a little ambitious considering the hostilities between Israel and Syria, Syria still angry about the occupation of the Golan Heights by Israel. But with Syria being strapped for cash, a deal is often struck between adversaries, and I thought little more about it.
Now with Sharon, Bush, Bolton, and Rice all trying to make a case against Syria, I see two possibilities. One: Syria has upped the anti for passage of the pipeines or two: Syria is being cut-out. The latter seems the greater possibility.
Either way, there seems little possibility that Bushco intents to leave Iraq anytime soon, or at all. That will entail killing almost all the Iraqis. All 27 million? Iran cannot allow that to happen.
Anyway, Karl is just throwing us a bone about troop reductions, with the 2006 elections coming up.
Expect a few more bones from Karl as the elections draw near, maybe even a few “terrorist” attacks, followed by an immediate capture and killing of the “suspects.”
German media report US is preparing possible attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
This is insanity.
The US economy and employment cannot stand another spike in the price of gasoline.Congress needs to shut-down crazy Bush/Sharon/Rice/Bolton.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1230/dailyUpdate.html
Crude oil is up $2 a barrel, so far.
This Bush lunatic needs to be removed from office by congress now.
Ed’s correct when he says the United States should not bomb the nuclear facilities in Iran, but for the wrong reasons.
There is supposedly information that Iran is cooperating with Al-Qaeda, and if so, the building of nuclear weapons by Iran means bad news for Israel. Anyone who doubts that Iran will use their nuclear facilities to make nuclear weapons has their head in the sand.
Ahmadinejad has gone on record as stating Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth. Put nuclear weapons and that statement together, and the result is catastrophe for Israel.
The interesting thing is Bush has gone on record as being in favor of bombing the nuclear facilities in Iran. If the information he has is correct, that thought deserves weight. However, it cannot succeed by the very fact that it will give Ahmadinejad a huge following in the mid-east. Also, if the United States does bomb Iran’s facilities, Turkey would be forced to jump in, and that’s not a good thing. Actually, Turkey would then jump into northern Iraq to make sure the PKK doesn’t get the upper hand in the region.
Iran’s actions of late have the capacity to start an all out war in the region. That war would include Israel, Syria, Pakistan, Turkey, Iran, Iraq and the United States. Possibly Russia as well. That’s world war three, folks, brought to you by extremists’ factions in the Iranian government. Not, as Ed seems to think, by the Israeli government. Which side would you want to be on?
Nonsense.
Ed,
Not nonsense. Clearly defined:
http://www.benadorassociates.com/article/18845
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=20001
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051208/wl_nm/nuclear_iran_ahmadinejad_dc_1
http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=55856
Your hatred of everything Zionist blinds you to what is actually going on in the world. The so-called information about the supposed American bombing of Iran comes from who, Ed? How about Spiegal online. Now there’s an outfit I want to believe . . . not. That organization is so far left, they are hardly standing on the same planet as most people. Their agenda is well known: The end of Israel and the United States.
What a better way to promulgate a reactionary strike by Israel than to spread rumors of an emminent strike in Iran by the United States. Israel knows that if Iran is bombed, the Iranian military will start the mother of all wars in the region, and that means the invasion of Israel.
As I said, ww3, brought to you by the extremists in Iran. Ya, Ed, real nonsense. Keep smoking that hookah, and riding them camels.
And we destroyed the only army in the region that even came close to countering Iran (besides Israel). I wonder what the situation would look like if we’d have stayed out.
CF: I am going to surprise you by agreeing that it was wrong to hold Padilla, a US citizen, without charges. However, now that he is going to be charged in civilian criminal court, what is the issue? If he is not transferred, won’t he just be released and then arrested again?
You’re an incredibly stupid man. You so desperately want to be an authority on a subject you know so very little about.
I don’t judge the Israeli Zionist Likud Party about anything other than the threat they represent. So does the rest of the world. Try reading about it.
The threat against Iran first came from the President of the United States, you dumb boso. Then the President left the threat, by only removing only the nuclear option { when crude oil spiked to $70 }. The threat against Iran has been openly discussed in both Ha’aretz and The Post, both Israeli newspapers, where a poll was taken for a preemptive strike on Iran. Only 13% of Israelis were against such a preemptive strike on Iran.
Get your head out of those comic books you read and learn something, you stupid jerk.
Ed,This is the last time I will even mention your ignorant name, or read your racist blogs.
Read your own post, mini-brain. They come from a distorted, ignorant, racist, bleeding heart moron. Of course only 13% of the Israeli’s are against bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities: the other 87% know that if Iran produces nuclear weapons, they will be used on Israel. Duh!
I read many posts, both blog and legitimate news articles. I think for myself. I don’t spout racist garbage I get from your Nazi web sites. Please, for everyones sake, swallow a toy cap and blow your mini-brain out. You gotta be the most ignorant semi-human being I have ever had the mis-pleasure to read.Adios, brain dead.
Todd,
A low regard for the enemy is the first characteristic of an idiot.
The British believed that the Japanese (before WWII) couldn’t fly airplanes at night, couldn’t build battleships, and had brains the size of monkeys.
When the Japs destroyed the British battleship, the Prince of Wales, and marched down the Malay pennisula and took Singapore, they were forced to reapprise their stupidity.
Similarly, you conservatives constantly snipe at the French, who gave us Charlemane the Great, provided most of the troops that retook lands during the Crusades, provided essential military aide during our war with England, and conquered Europe under Napoleon.
Why don’t you try reading history instead of just mis-understanding it?
Moron.
Scribe – as I’ve already told the monkey that talks, I’ve seen these Arab warriors in action. Cowardly punks, down to the last man.
You thinking you know what you’re talking about without ever having been there is a real knee-slapper.
Todd, why would you sign Scribe’s blogname to your post? Do you do that often? We have a troll on this site that does that sort of thing…..