I'm dragging myself to the computer at this late hour to post three reactions (one is a pre-action I suppose) to the latest SCOTUS squeaker of a pro-democracy/anti-BushCo (you can't have one without the other) decision.
Dahlia Lathwick, writing at Slate:
The Supreme Court's decision Thursday in Boumediene v. Bush and Al Odah v. United States is—as all the big enemy-combatant cases have been—both enormously important and relatively insignificant. This is, after all, the third stinging setback and blistering rebuke the court has handed the Bush administration with respect to prisoner rights at Guantanamo. Yet you may have noticed that all of these setbacks and rebukes have mostly meant more hot days in orange jumpsuits, more solitary confinement, and ever more plus ça change for the detainees there.
David Barron commenting at Slate on BushCo's promise to undermine the decision for our own good:
"Congress and the administration worked very carefully on a piece of legislation that set the appropriate procedures in place as to how to deal with the detainees," he [BushCo] said. "We'll study this opinion, and we'll do so with this in mind to determine whether or not additional legislation might be appropriate so that we can safely say, truly say to the American people. 'We are doing everything we can to protect you.' "Notice the president focuses on deciding whether there needs to be a legislative response to ensure "we are doing everything we can to protect you" rather than to correct the procedural deficiencies in the current legislation that led the court to conclude that it failed to provide the habeas right the Constitution guarantees in the absence of a valid suspension. In other words, it does not sound like the legislation he has in mind would be what we ordinarily think of as a legislative "fix."
And finally, Stephen Colbert from almost exactly two years ago channeling BushCo today:
Comments