Jewish mysticism, contemporary politics, and personal musings, Torture, Treason, Corruption, Lies and Incompetence
The Court Enters the War, LoudlyBy Adam LiptakPublished: July 2, 2006The court's decision in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, Professor Yoo said, may signal the collapse of the entire enterprise. "It could affect detention conditions, interrogation methods, the use of force," he said. "It could affect every aspect of the war on terror."The logic of the ruling and its requirement that Congress directly authorize presidential actions even in wartime has broad implications. For one thing, said Laurence H. Tribe, a law professor at Harvard, it seems to destroy the administration's argument that Congress blessed the National Security Agency's domestic surveillance program when it voted for the authorization.Because Article II of the Constitution, among other things, anoints the president as commander in chief, Professor Yoo and other administration lawyers have argued the president can ignore or override laws that seem to limit his authority to conduct war. In the current struggle against terrorism, they argue, the entire world is the battlefield.Perhaps not any more. Steven G. Calabresi, a law professor at Northwestern and a founder of the Federalist Society, the conservative legal group, said this second argument is also in trouble."The court is certainly not embracing the broader Article II power," he said.Continue Reading This Article...
