theweaselking: (Default)
[personal profile] theweaselking
US Supreme Court tosses "detainee treatment act", declares that prisoners *do*, in fact, have rights in the USA.

The judgement, unsurprisingly, was 5-4, with the 5 fact-based judges overruling the 4 faith-based crazy people.

Of course, this only applies to the few prisoners we know about, who are held in the few "official" prisons, and not the ones who are completely denied all access to legal counsel while they're raped, tortured, and murdered after having been disappeared, but it's a start.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-06-12 04:34 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] theamaranth.livejournal.com
it's a step in the right direction, at least.

how ANYONE could say prisoners don't have basic rights?

(no subject)

Date: 2008-06-12 04:45 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] http://users.livejournal.com/_jeremiad/
'cause they're not americans and god only gave basic rights to americans.

or something.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-06-12 04:41 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jsbowden.livejournal.com
I particularly like the language slapping the Executive and Legislative branches for thinking that they can exclude the Judiciary from the process. That will come in handy in a far broader scope than I think anyone realizes just yet.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-06-12 05:16 pm (UTC)
ext_8707: Taken in front of Carnegie Hall (cornholio)
From: [identity profile] ronebofh.livejournal.com
ZOMG ACTIVIST JUDGES!!!!1

(no subject)

Date: 2008-06-12 04:46 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] http://users.livejournal.com/_jeremiad/
I'd never heard it being called "disappeared," but the more I think about it, the more it fits.

Fuck.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-06-12 05:50 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dreamshade.livejournal.com
From the Roberts dissent:

So who has won? ...certainly not the American people, who today lose a bit more control over the conduct of this Nation’s foreign policy to unelected, politically unaccountable judges.

So... Roberts hates himself?

Of course, there's also the Scalia dissent, but we already expect the Scalia dissent to be hilarious.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-06-12 06:11 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dreamshade.livejournal.com
Wow, I'm scanning the Roberts opinion more... Roberts is pissed. I've never read any of his other writings where he outright accuses the other half of the court of being a bunch of idiots.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-06-13 12:41 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] theweaselking.livejournal.com
Roberts was the second choice after HARRIET MYERS, and before SAMUEL ALITO. Chosen by GEORGE BUSH.

Why are you AT ALL surprised that he and his mail-order law degree act like they might have been chosen for loyalty instead of competence? Did you think George "Heckuva job, Drownie" Bush ever chose anyone because they'd be *good* at their job?

(no subject)

Date: 2008-06-13 01:08 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dreamshade.livejournal.com
No, I'm saying - his other reports have been mostly subdued, at least. He tends to use twisted logic and has a habit of deciding what he thinks of a topic and then going to find evidence to support it. But this one, it feels like he let Scalia do the writing for him. He's just outright angry that he ended up on the losing side. We've heard his whole deference to Congress and the executive shtick already, but he's just about thrown a temper tantrum over his Supreme Court daring to, y'know, act like a court.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-06-12 07:00 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] graethorne.livejournal.com
Roberts never should've been allowed NEAR the SCotUS... let alone appointed to it.

As was said above, this ruling is a start. There's a lot more that needs to be addressed, tho'... including an impeachment festival, which must -unlike the Nixon fiasco- be continued afeter the change of regeime next January. History must show that -no matter how spastic a frenzy the populace and government plunge into- excesses perpetrated in the midst (especially those with totalitarian ulterior motives) WILL be redressed.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-06-12 10:09 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] sivi-volk.livejournal.com
The problem with impeachment is Clinton's impeachment hearing devalued the concept so much that it'll just be seen as a standard partisan attack on the President instead of the Constitutional smackdown that it ought to be.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-06-12 10:53 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] graethorne.livejournal.com
Sadly, you could be right. However, in combination with war crimes trials to follow, it could grow some new teeth...

(no subject)

Date: 2008-06-13 12:34 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] anton-p-nym.livejournal.com
Don't impeach the Bush League. Extradite 'em instead.

-- Steve's thinking that the ICC would get serious cred if it had Cheney (in full Hannibal Lector regalia, of course) before it.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-06-20 04:30 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lafinjack.livejournal.com
I misread your comment ad had an image of Cheney as a blue-slathered Titus.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-06-14 07:07 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] atlasimpure.livejournal.com
I seriously did my "happy dance" in front of my CO when I heard about this and he wanted to know what I was so excited about...

"The Constitution's not DEAD, Sir. I'd say that's worth a happy dance."

(no subject)

Date: 2008-06-14 07:29 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] theweaselking.livejournal.com
I don't think I've ever asked: What's your rank and branch?

If you don't feel like telling me, feel free to tell me to fuck off. I don't mind. I'm just curious.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-06-14 07:44 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] atlasimpure.livejournal.com
Corporal, USMC.

I got out a little over 2 years ago and then got scooped up by the current round of involuntary recalls.

Profile

theweaselking: (Default)theweaselking
Page generated Jul. 10th, 2025 01:54 am