Left Turn at Gitmo

There is definitely mixed emotions around the blogosphere over yesterday’s Supreme Court ruling granting habeas right to Gitmo detainees. The right is upset because of the difficulties the decision will cause those actually fight the terrorists on the front line. The left is thrilled the Bush Administrations disregard for domestic and international law and human rights has been rebuked. I can see both sides of the argument. I guess I still have a lot of lawyer in me.

Justice Scalia was correct in declaring the ruling will cost American lives. Many guilty detainees are going to go free along with the innocent. Those that are guilty are going to go right back to plotting against Americans in this lovely little jihad thing that have going. As much sympathy as the detainees have inspired by various human rights groups, they are the lowest of the low. They are murderers, thieves, and rapists in their home countries in their own countries before they found “redemption” in radical Islam. But that is what law is all about—giving a fair shake to the least deserving. No wonder the world hates lawyers.

But aside from the less than favorable outcomes of detainee trials, we are going to have to fight the war differently now. The problem is now they are fighting a war and the US is conducting a criminal investigation. I am only half joking when I say now soldiers may haveto read Miranda rights to a captured terrorists on the battlefield or even consult with a JAG as to whether it is worthwhile to capture him at all. Maybe that makes as better people in principle, but when bullets start flying, who the heck cares about that?

My presidential pick, John McCain, wants to shut down Gitmo to avoid any further moral debates over their status. I am fine with that, I suppose. I do not care about the human rights issue the left are so concerned with, mind you. I know full well any future prisoners taken in the war on terror will be handed over to allied countries for a lot more brutal treatment than water boarding, sleep dprivation, and listening to Britney Spears CDs all day long. One way or another, this all out war is going to be fought on the dirtiest, but necessary levels.

Do I like the idea? No. But I never considered the ruins of the World Trade Center a crime scene. It was the first “battle” in a long, brutal war. Whether they were irregular fighters or not, the detainees should have been given POW status, tried, and punished. The death penalty would have applied under international law, to boot. If it is war, fight it like one so we can keep sheltered old justices from tying our hands over making the wrong the Bush Administration’s wrong call years ago.

SCOTUS: Gitmo Detainees Have Habeas Rights

I presume they were supposed to be read their Miranda rights, too,, before being taken from the battlefields of Afghanistan. It is difficult to do that when you are being shot at, but I suppose life appointed justices never have to worry about such things.

I have not read the entire seventy (?!) page opinion yet, so I cannot comment on whether the legal arguments lead logically to the ruling. But I do understand the heart of the problem was the Bush Administration’s cowboy diplomacy in the matter of redefining the status of the detainees in order to avoid judicial review in the first place. The Geneva Convention itself allows for the summary execution of illegal combatants to begin with. But if Bush had labeled them POWs, they could have been tried, convicted, and legitimately sentenced to the death penalty all within the legitimacy of international law.

Now we have scandals over torture, the circus that will be civilian trials assuming other countries do not take all the prisoners themselves, and some guilty detainees walking free along with innocent ones. Americans are going to be put in danger with this ruling, but it is still largely the Bush Administration’s fault.

Here those frequent “thud” sounds? It is ACLU lawyers colliding with each other at airports trying to buy tickets to Gitmo to drum up business.