WHEN DO THE AXIS POWs GET THEIR TRIALS:

Blank Check for Bush? (David Cole, 10/06/05, The Nation)

In June 2004 the Supreme Court sharply rejected George W. Bush's assertions that he had unchecked unilateral authority to lock up indefinitely any person he declared an "enemy combatant" in the global "war on terrorism." Writing for the Court, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor declared that a "state of war is not a blank check for the President." The enemy combatant decisions offered hope that at least one branch of government understood the importance of the rule of law even in wartime. Recent developments, however, are a sober reminder that the judiciary's checking function remains an open question. Two courts have recently upheld two of Bush's most controversial actions, while two others have rejected arguments that national security should trump the rule of law. Further appeals are certain, and the new Court will have the final word. What it will say may be the most critical issue to pursue in the upcoming confirmation hearings.

In bthge middle of a war the Left wants the Court to intervene on behalf of enemy combatants for the first time in our history and then folks wonder why the President wants two justices with experience in the executive branch?

Posted by Orrin Judd at October 7, 2005 11:47 AM