Sunday, March 26, 2006

Perhaps Charles Lane can replace Ben Domenech

Lane reports "Court Case Challenges Power of President":
Seized by U.S. forces in Afghanistan and imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, Osama bin Laden's former chauffeur is now seeking victory over President Bush in a new arena: the Supreme Court.
No. This is wrong in so many ways. Being tried in a civilian court is no grand victory, and if the court rules in Hamdan's favor, it hardly deals the President any grand blow. It would establish that the United States is a nation of laws, not a personality cult centered around the occupant of the White House.

The Court won't rule on whether Hamdan is a nice person, or the validity of his cause. The court will rule on his right to habeas corpus, and the rights of every person under US law. That we have independent courts to rule on these matters is a bulwark against the sort of world Bin Laden would create, and that Hamdan can bring his claim to the Supreme Court is a victory for us all.

Washington Post reporters should know that, even if they are cribbing from an AP report.