Charlie Savage posted an article in the New York Times titled "Obama Upholds Detainee Policy in Afghanistan." The Obama administration has told a federal judge that military detainees in Afghanistan have no legal right to challenge their imprisonment there, embracing a key argument of former President Bush’s legal team. The Justice Department said that the new administration had reviewed its position in a case brought by prisoners at the U.S Air Force base at Bagram, just north of the Afghan capital. The Obama team determined that the Bush policy was correct: such prisoners cannot sue for their release. The detainees argue that they are not enemy combatants, and they want a judge to review the evidence against them and order the military to release them. The Bush administration had argued that federal courts have no jurisdiction to hear such a case because the prisoners are non citizens being held in the course of military operations outside the United States. The Obama team was required to take a stand on whether those arguments were correct because a federal district judge, John D. Bates, asked the new government whether it wanted to alter that position. The power of civilian federal judges to review individual decisions by the executive branch to hold a terrorism suspect as an enemy combatant was one of the most contentious legal issues surrounding the Bush administration. For years, President Bush’s legal team argued that federal judges had no authority under the Constitution to hear challenges by detainees being held at the military prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and elsewhere. The Supreme Court rejected the Bush administration’s legal view for prisoners held at Guantánamo in landmark rulings in 2004 and 2006. But those rulings were based on the idea that the prison was on U.S. soil for constitutional purposes, based on the unique legal circumstances and history of the naval base. After becoming president last month, Mr. Obama issued orders requiring strict adherence to antitorture rules and shuttering the Guantánamo prison within a year. He also ordered a review of whether conditions there meet the standards of humane treatment required by the, and a review of what could be done with each of the 245 detainees who remain at the prison.
I think this artice gives very good detail. I think Obama should keep some of Bush's plans and also make plans of his own. They should keep the prisoners. They were there for a reason and should be punished.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Good article summary! All of this is crazy to me, I never understood why he wanted to even think of shutting down the most largest terrorist holding facility??? WHY??? Makes no since, I agree with you, he does need to stick with some of Bush's ideas because his ideas here lately are scary, and mostly uncalled for! The prisoners need to stay where they need to be, and especially terrorist, isn't that what the war is against right now? Im not a government person, or a war "advisee" but I do have a little incite on the topic.
ReplyDeletei agree that the prisoners are there for a reason, but the tourture that these prisoners are subjected to, in my opinion is cruel and not necessary. I feel that that the prison should not be closed but maybe Obama should consider replacing the staff and keeping the prison under good supervision.
ReplyDeleteGreat coverage of the topic. I agree with Talia Danielle Kendrick on the whole reason of why Obama would shut it down. I think we need it. It has served the purpose for all of these years and we needed it then, we still need it now. It might be cruel to hold prisioners there and do certain things, everyone knows happens, but I would rather them be there then blowing up my family or friends.
ReplyDelete