It’s not surprising that the New York Times editorial board opposes the detainee interrogation bill that the Senate approved Thursday night. But its editorial Thursday is worth reading, because it provides a concise list of what it sees as the bill’s biggest flaws — including “a dangerously broad definition of illegal enemy combatant” that could give a president the power “to apply this label to anyone he wanted.”
One thing that seems clear is that the bill will end up in court. In fact, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (in photo), R-Pa., is counting on that. He had said the bill was “patently unconstitutional on its face” and tried to amend it. Yet he ended up voting for it anyway, explaining that “the court will clean it up” by striking the habeas corpus provisions, the Washington Post reported.
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.
Do you tweet? Follow us on Twitter: @WE_Tweet.