Best Viewed with IE or Opera. Sorry, Firefox works, but loses some sidebar layout,
'my profile' and other stuff... Anybody with a fix, please leave a comment. Many thanks in advance.

That said, if you must use Firefox (and I don't blame you, it's become my browser of choice, too)
...get the "IE Tab" extension. This allows you to view problem pages with the IE rendering engine. Very cool!

Thursday, June 29, 2006

Think Progress » Supreme Court Decision on Gitmo Undermines Bush's Legal Case For Warrantless Wiretapping

<b> The impact of today's Supreme Court decision on military commissions
goes well beyond Guantanamo. </b>
The Supreme Court has ruled that the Authorization for the Use of Military
Force - issued by Congress in the days after 9/11 - is not a blank check for
the administration. From the syllabus:

Neither the AUMF [Authorization for the Use of Military Force] nor the DTA
[Detainee Treatment Act] can be read to provide specific, overriding
authorization for the commission convened to try Hamdan. Assuming the AUMF
activated the President's war powers, see Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U. S. 507,
and that those powers include authority to convene military commissions in
appropriate circumstances, see, e.g., id., at 518, there is nothing in the
AUMF's text or legislative history even hinting that Congress intended to
expand or alter the authorization set forth in UCMJ Art. 21. The impact of
today's Supreme Court decision on military commissions goes well beyond
Guantanamo.

The point here is that the AUMF does not authorize activity that was not
specifically contemplated in the text or legislative history. This is
incredibly significant. The administration is relying on the AUMF to justify
its warrantless wiretapping program. Here's Alberto Gonzales on 12/19/05:

Our position is, is that the authorization to use force, which was passed by
the Congress in the days following September 11th, constitutes that other
authorization, that other statute by Congress, to engage in this kind of
signals intelligence.

The Bush administration doesn't argue that warrantless wiretapping was
something specifically contemplated in the text or by Congress. Rather, the
administration argues that it is implied as part of a broad authorization to
"use all necessary and appropriate force."

The Supreme Court has rejected that expansive interpretation. It's a huge
blow to the administration's legal rationale for warrantless wiretapping.

Filed under: Legal, Intelligence

Posted by Judd at 11:18 amThe impact of today's Supreme Court decision on
military commissions goes well beyond Guantanamo.
---------
SOURCE......href="http://thinkprogress.org/2006/06/29/gitmo-wiretapping/">Supreme Court
Decision on Gitmo Undermines Bush

1 Comments:

Anonymous Scoopernicus said...

About Fricken Time. Even with a stacked court, the Supremes have some standards.

6/29/2006 7:25 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

free webpage hit counter

Performancing