Dear President Bush: Defy this Opinion
By Leon H Wolf Posted in Judicial Overreaching | Law | Liberals | Separation of Powers — Comments (63) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
-Justice Anthony Kennedy
According to the United States Constitution, Article III section 2:
In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
On two separate occasions now, the United States Congress has duly enacted painstakingly specific laws to lawfully and Constitutionally strip the Supreme Court of jurisdiction to hear cases involving non-citizens currently detained outside of sovereign territory held by the United States. As Dan McLaughlin has noted, today the Supreme Court purports to ignore this clear limitation on its own authority to even hear the case before it (which by law has been confined to the CADC) and issue an opinion declaring the act which removed their jurisdiction unconstitutional. Savor the irony for a moment, if you will.
With his trademark dullard arrogance, Justice Kennedy informs us that enforcing the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 and the Military Commissions Act of 2006 would "permit a striking anomaly in our tripartite system of government, leading to a regime in which Congress and the President, not this Court, say 'what the law is.'" How astute of you to notice, Justice Kennedy, that Congress and the President got the idea that they had the Constitutional authority to say 'what the law is,' by, say, passing laws through both chambers of Congress, and submitting them for the approval or veto of the President. It's almost as though they read Article I, section 7, and then Article III, Section 2, and got the idea that they had some say in "what the law is." Thank God Anthony Kennedy is here to clear up this confusion on the part of the duly elected representatives of the people of the United States. Hope you guys understand: allowing this would be "anomalous."
The reasons why the Suspension Clause do not apply to non-citizens detained outside the territorial jurisdiction have been hashed and rehashed already on the front page of RedState; I will not go over them again here. As it happens, I haven't been convinced that giving Gitmo detainees access to United States courts would be the end of the world. Nevertheless, I believe that this case presents such an important question that now is the time for President Bush to openly and forthrightly defy this usurping court.
The issue here is not the detainees at Gitmo: the issue is a Court which recognizes no limits on its own authority - whose members sit for life tenure, never subject to any electoral consequences for their decisions. When such a body refuses to recognize lawfully and Constitutionally enacted limits on its own authority, it threatens the very foundations of our representative Democracy. The Court must be sent a message to remind them of the truly limited power that they do possess under the Constitution, and the limited power they should possess in a representative Democracy.
Andrew Jackson once invited the Supreme Court to attempt to enforce one of their decisions, if they could. It is time for President Bush to extend the same invitation to this usurping court.