Comments on: The Black Hole of Bagram http://www.andyworthington.co.uk/2010/05/25/the-black-hole-of-bagram/ Investigative journalist, author, filmmaker and Guantanamo expert Thu, 09 Feb 2012 02:54:21 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: What is Obama Doing at Bagram? (Part Two): Executive Detention, Rendition, Review Boards, Released Prisoners and Trials « Dandelion Salad http://www.andyworthington.co.uk/2010/05/25/the-black-hole-of-bagram/comment-page-1/#comment-59164 What is Obama Doing at Bagram? (Part Two): Executive Detention, Rendition, Review Boards, Released Prisoners and Trials « Dandelion Salad Fri, 04 Jun 2010 22:01:05 +0000 http://www.andyworthington.co.uk/?p=8373#comment-59164 [...] weeks ago, the Court of Appeals shamefully overturned Judge Bates’ ruling, hurling the foreign prisoners rendered to Bagram from other countries back into a legal black hole [...] [...] weeks ago, the Court of Appeals shamefully overturned Judge Bates’ ruling, hurling the foreign prisoners rendered to Bagram from other countries back into a legal black hole [...]

]]> By: Naadir Jeewa http://www.andyworthington.co.uk/2010/05/25/the-black-hole-of-bagram/comment-page-1/#comment-59116 Naadir Jeewa Thu, 03 Jun 2010 22:18:11 +0000 http://www.andyworthington.co.uk/?p=8373#comment-59116 Nice analysis. Was glad I came to the screening at Birkbeck the other day. Sadly, I don't think a future SCOTUS will pass anything as good as the judgements of <em>Boumediene</em>. Stevens is gone, and Elena Kagan seems to be quite happy with expansive executive power, as I think Jack Balkin argued the other week, so the fact that she would have to excuse herself from this case wouldn't make much difference. The problem with those rulings however, is simply that it relies on declaring Guantanamo as <em>de facto</em> sovereign territory of the US (<em>Rasul</em>), which would be more difficult to argue in the case of Bagram. Also, the courts will just defer to the executive branch, since I'm sure Holder or whoever will just say authorisation has already been given by congress in the 2006 & 2009 MCAs. So, darker times ahead, methinks. Nice analysis. Was glad I came to the screening at Birkbeck the other day.

Sadly, I don’t think a future SCOTUS will pass anything as good as the judgements of Boumediene. Stevens is gone, and Elena Kagan seems to be quite happy with expansive executive power, as I think Jack Balkin argued the other week, so the fact that she would have to excuse herself from this case wouldn’t make much difference.
The problem with those rulings however, is simply that it relies on declaring Guantanamo as de facto sovereign territory of the US (Rasul), which would be more difficult to argue in the case of Bagram. Also, the courts will just defer to the executive branch, since I’m sure Holder or whoever will just say authorisation has already been given by congress in the 2006 & 2009 MCAs.

So, darker times ahead, methinks.

]]>