Favorite Links
Archive
12/01/2003 - 01/01/2004
01/01/2004 - 02/01/2004
02/01/2004 - 03/01/2004
03/01/2004 - 04/01/2004
04/01/2004 - 05/01/2004
05/01/2004 - 06/01/2004
06/01/2004 - 07/01/2004
07/01/2004 - 08/01/2004
08/01/2004 - 09/01/2004
09/01/2004 - 10/01/2004
10/01/2004 - 11/01/2004
11/01/2004 - 12/01/2004
12/01/2004 - 01/01/2005
01/01/2005 - 02/01/2005
02/01/2005 - 03/01/2005
03/01/2005 - 04/01/2005
04/01/2005 - 05/01/2005
05/01/2005 - 06/01/2005
06/01/2005 - 07/01/2005
07/01/2005 - 08/01/2005
08/01/2005 - 09/01/2005
10/01/2005 - 11/01/2005
11/01/2005 - 12/01/2005
12/01/2005 - 01/01/2006
01/01/2006 - 02/01/2006
02/01/2006 - 03/01/2006
03/01/2006 - 04/01/2006
04/01/2006 - 05/01/2006
05/01/2006 - 06/01/2006
06/01/2006 - 07/01/2006
08/01/2006 - 09/01/2006
11/01/2010 - 12/01/2010
BlogRoll
Syndicate this site
You Should Read Every Word They Write:
Donate
|
Thursday, July 01, 2004Anyone interested in liberty, limited government (particularly the limitation of the power of the courts), and the war on terror needs to read Andrew C. McCarthy' summary of the recent Supreme Court decisions concerning the detention of enemy combatants.The real scary decision is the Rasul v. Bush decision -- one I view as not only utterly flawed, but potentially catastrophic. Apparently, the US Supreme Court believes that its jurisdiction extends to all persons at any location on the face of the planet. And apparently, there is really no such thing as a POW anymore, just litigants whose rights the court feel they need to protect. Good grief. Here are some of my predictions that will follow:
The specter of masses of POW's all being given court appointed lawyers and filing petitions for their release is ludicrous. Something needs to be done to reel in the over-weaning pride of the US Supreme Court. [Permalink] (0) comments
Comments:
Post a Comment
|
Contact Banterings
Add Us To Your Blogroll
Get Involved
|