SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: D. Long who wrote (171631)6/29/2006 11:02:17 PM
From: carranza2  Read Replies (1) of 793917
 
It is not a simple decision to understand, and I'm not entirely sure I do.

The takeaway I have from my first cursory reading is that the Geneva Conventions are not, yes, not, usable by the Gitmo prisoners offensively as substantive law governing their rights. It is clear that the detainees are not going to be able to make claims based on the GCs. Instead, the Court held illegal the way in which the Commissions were set up.

The UCMJ, which will now apply, requires that the trials be conducted under the standards of the the laws of warfare; the GCs are part of such laws. The various GCs are part of a larger body of laws which govern the manner in which the trials are to be conducted. Since the UCMJ incorporates these laws of warfare, the GCs standards, and other laws, apply.

I think these are the most important points. I'm not sure the decision is that significant if my reading is correct as I appreciate that the government is using the substantive standards set forth in the GCs without admitting that they apply.

I agree with your assessment of the decision concerning conspiracy. I have a hard time agreeing with the notion that a conspiracy charge should be allowed against a formal or informal combatant.

I have a hard time with the paper-thin distinctions made by the majority in distinguishing Eisentrager.

caselaw.lp.findlaw.com

On the whole, not a terrible decision at first glance.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News