Supreme Court To Give Terrorists US Trials

It appears the Al Qaidas will finally get there day in US Court. The usual suspects: Ginsburg, Breyer, Stephens, Kennedy & Sueter are all "troubled" over Mlitary Tribunals. John Roberts has recused himself from the case leaving only three grounded Justices to hold the line.

This means we'll have another exercise in anti-American edicts hurled down by US "Supremes".

I'll bet Ruth "Buzzy" manages to stay awake this time...

_____________________________________________________________________________________
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2006-03-28T205745Z_01_N28181810_RTRUKOC_0_US-SECURITY-COURT.xml&rpc=22

(reuters) Salim Ahmed Hamdan's lawyers challenged the tribunals as unconstitutional because they allow the president, through his military subordinates, to define the crime, select the prosecutor and judges and set all the rules.

"It's an extraordinary act, I think, to withdraw jurisdiction from this court in a pending case," Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said during arguments that may yield the most significant ruling on presidential war powers since World War Two.

Justice Stephen Breyer said he was concerned the president, and not the U.S. Congress, would define what is a crime. "Isn't there a separation of powers problem there?"

Justice John Paul Stevens said he had similar reservations. "I don't think we've ever held that the president can make something a crime" when international law holds that it is not, he said.

HAMDAN 'UNIQUELY VULNERABLE'

Justice Anthony Kennedy, who could control the outcome as the high court's potential swing vote between liberals and conservatives, also questioned the government's arguments. "Why isn't Hamdan a uniquely vulnerable individual?" he asked.

Justice David Souter appeared visibly upset by Clement's suggestion that Congress, without explicitly saying so, had in the new law suspended the right of Guantanamo prisoners to bring court challenges.