Bush May Turn Legal Setback on Guantanamo Into a Political Win

(snip)
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, a Tennessee Republican, pledged to craft legislation addressing the court's ruling that tribunals weren't explicitly authorized by Congress and didn't adequately protect the rights of the accused. Democrats such as Senator Carl Levin of Michigan said they would cooperate.

Congress will give Bush ``a win because he was in his rights,'' said Senator Trent Lott, a Mississippi Republican. ``It could be a victory for him, and certainly the American people will be outraged again by the Supreme Court.''


(snip)
Some Democrats left little doubt they would use the court ruling to question the presidential powers Bush invoked to justify several controversial decisions, including the military tribunals, secret domestic eavesdropping, monitoring of financial transactions and what Democrats said was an effort to scale back Congress's authority.

`Arrogance and Incompetence'

``For five years, the Bush-Cheney administration has violated fundamental American values, tarnished our standing in the world and hindered the partnerships we need with our allies,'' said Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the senior Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, in a statement. ``This arrogance and incompetence have delayed and weakened the handling of the war on terror, not because of any coherent strategic view it had, but because of its stubborn unilateralism and dangerous theory of unfettered power.''


http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=afmj1ofFuop8&refer=

It's dead.

They kid, they kid



:rofl:

since the beginning, the ideas of "Balance of Power" and "Checks and Balances" have kept Congress and the President from conceding any of their own Constitutional power to one another . . . proposals that Congress believed infringed on their prerogatives were quickly squelched, and by both parties . . .

these people are our elected representatives in Congress, and the Constitution very specifically gives them the powers of making laws and going to war as a nation . . . and they're openly and even brazenly talking about ceding a lot of that power to a president who has yet to make a good decision about anything -- a concession that will apply not only to this president, but to every future chief executive . . .

are these people completely crazy? . . .

Enough. SCOTUS has spoken. Period.

question:

so Frist comes ups with legislation, jams it through Congress, bush sign it and now it's "law". The lawyers for the prisoners would start the ball rolling and challenge the constitutionality of it.

After a few months/years it ends up right back in SCOTUS. SCOTUS then rules it is unconstitutional - what next? will the bushies try to do the same crap again?

If the Frist bill does become law - the first thing I would do is file a motion to to stop it pending a hearing on it's constitutionality.

The Frist bill sends the wrong message, coupled with bush's signing statements it says "the law of the land does not apply to us", it says "we can change the rules if we don't like them"

Laws are essentially words on a piece of paper. There are many laws on the books that are not followed, not obeyed and not enforced because they are no longer thought to apply

a few examples: (see: http://www.dumblaws.com/random-laws/)

** It is illegal to fish with a bow and arrow in Kentucky.

** Honking one’s car horn at a sandwich shop after 9 PM is against the law.

** It is illegal to sleep naked.

** Four women may not rent an apartment together.

** Auctions may not be advertised by hiring trombone players to play on the street.

While these laws give us a chuckle now - they were just as dead serious about it then as frist is now. These "crazy laws" are not enforced because there is no longer any respect for them - but they are still on the books, and technically people can be arrested for breaking them.

The strength and validity of a law is dependent on the willingness of the officials and citizens to obey, follow and enforce the law. What this frist bill does is to change some words to facilitate the aquisition of more power by bush. If this flies - where does it stop? With a rubber-stamping congress bowing and scraping to every bush whim - what's to stop them from declaring bush ruler of the freaking universe?

This is more than just addressing 1 ruling by SCOTUS - this is further erosion of our democracy. We are fighting in Iraq supposedly to bring them democracy - but it's becoming apparant that we are fighting for democracy over there so we won't have democracy here

the Executive, it is time for all Dems who still believe in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to join the Green Party.

If the majority of Dems in the REPUBLICAN-CONTROLLED Congress acceed this power to - it's time for americans to revolt