Election year show trials
Monday, June 25, 2012
Justinian in Citizens United, Drones, Guantanamo, Habeas, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Roger Fitch Esq
Justinian in Citizens United, Drones, Guantanamo, Habeas, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Roger Fitch Esq
US Supremes summarily dismiss review of Citizens United ... Judicial
appointments frozen ... Obama's drone frenzy makes him
"hit-man-in-chief" ... Guantánamo trials seek to neuter Republican
bellicosity ... The sham of habeas hearings ...
Our Man in Washington reports
IT'S an election year,
and Mother
Jones has a handy list of how much a seat in Congress will cost you.
These calculations are not mere cynicism, as the 2010 Citizens
United decision of the Supreme Court has made unlimited corporate money
the essential medium in US elections.
Now the Supreme Court's conservative majority has just dismissed in a single paragraph attempts by
Montana, or any other state, to impose restraints on corporate election
spending.
Meanwhile, the lower courts remain clogged with
around 70 judicial vacancies remaining to be filled.
As always happens with an approaching presidential
election, the opposition is blocking all judicial appointments -in this case,
it's the Republicans, confident that a President Romney will appoint only
ideologues and "movement conservative" judges
fully responsive to corporate and party wish lists.
As for the 2012 presidential election, it's shaping up as a terrorist-killing competition between Romney and Obama, a quest for "Assassin-in Chief".
Mr Obama is presently unsurpassed at killing.
As for the 2012 presidential election, it's shaping up as a terrorist-killing competition between Romney and Obama, a quest for "Assassin-in Chief".
Mr Obama is presently unsurpassed at killing.
Leaks
to the NY Times show his prowess at personally approving those
selected for terrorist immortality, in a "war" whose very existence many
question.
Inevitably, a fair number of innocent civilians will be
called upon to join the handful of terrorists in the Islamic hereafter - far
more than the number of innocent American
civilians killed by terrorists each year - 17 in 2011, 15 the year before.
At last, a quiescent media is taking notice of Mr Obama's
refined taste for assassination.
The
Guardian is calling it the "normalisation of
extrajudicial murder", while a
Miami Herald writer has described Obama as the "hitman in
chief " who has launched six times as many drones as "the lawless
yahoo Bush".
The target list conveniently includes anyone likely to
get hit. Unless proved otherwise later (i.e. after death), all "military
age males" in a strike zone are presumed to have been targetable
"militants", and if there are children among them, the Pentagon has a
ready excuse in the "adult-sized child". Glenn Greenwald has more.
In the ultimate Catch-22, dead civilians can only establish their innocence posthumously.
In the ultimate Catch-22, dead civilians can only establish their innocence posthumously.
Even the
New York Times delicately ventured, it was "too much power
for a president".
The UN special rapporteur on extrajudicial
killings has not
shied from using the words "war crime".
A new book traces the journey of Mr Obama from Nobel Peace Prize laureate to Murder Inc. godfather. Gabor Ron and Daphne Eviatar of Human Rights First comment.
A new book traces the journey of Mr Obama from Nobel Peace Prize laureate to Murder Inc. godfather. Gabor Ron and Daphne Eviatar of Human Rights First comment.
* *
*
WITH such notches on his
"terror war" belt, Obama the "national security" enthusiast
has travelled so far to the right that there's precious little room for Romney
to manoeuvre.
An important ploy in the marginalisation of the
Republican remnants will be the Guantánamo show trials.
The trials are about to resume at Guantánamo, with the arraignment of Khalid Sheikh Mohamed and the 9/11 Gang, even as the commissions' doubtful constitutionality is being considered by the DC Circuit.
The trials are about to resume at Guantánamo, with the arraignment of Khalid Sheikh Mohamed and the 9/11 Gang, even as the commissions' doubtful constitutionality is being considered by the DC Circuit.
The KSM trial is being called the
trial of the century.
Nominally, these trials remain "military
commissions", though few charges have had any connection to military
offences.
Nevertheless, as the apostate former Chief Prosecutor at
Guantánamo, Morris Davis, notes,
the US has handed KSM all he wants with a wonderful propaganda trial by an
illegal tribunal, leading to his glorious martyrdom by lethal injection.
The confessed mass-murderer will die a
"warrior", though nothing he has done occurred in any US war.
A gratified KSM, adopting the government's classification
of him as a "warrior", is now
demanding the right to wear a military-style uniform at his
trial.
KSM's judge, US Army Col.
James Pohl, is no doubt mindful of the fate of the original judge in Omar
Khadr's military commission: when Judge Peter Brownback strayed from the
Pentagon script, he was summarily removed and retired in a matter of days (see my post of June 2, 2008).
There's already a
defence motion to remove Judge Pohl from the Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri case,
which he is also hearing.
After six or eight years of pretty much ignoring
Guantánamo's system of military justice for "terrorists", the press
has suddenly come alive with the arraignment
and ongoing pre-trial motions of Nashiri, alleged to have been the
ringleader of the USS Cole bombing (formerly, merely an
"unindicted co-conspirator").
Professor David Frakt has a piece on the double standards involved in assassinations and commissions and has also written on the pretend nature of the alleged offences.
Professor David Frakt has a piece on the double standards involved in assassinations and commissions and has also written on the pretend nature of the alleged offences.
Nashiri's actions come closest to qualifying as a valid
war crime, except there wasn't a war in Yemen in 2000.
As David Glazier, another dissenting law professor has observed, the particular charges against Al Nashiri are logically impossible as there was no war and making it a war offence only increases defences available to the defendant, perhaps even creating insurmountable obstacles to a successful prosecution.
As David Glazier, another dissenting law professor has observed, the particular charges against Al Nashiri are logically impossible as there was no war and making it a war offence only increases defences available to the defendant, perhaps even creating insurmountable obstacles to a successful prosecution.
* *
*
I PREVIOUSLY reported the
rearguard action of partisan Republicans on the DC Circuit, bent on blocking
the implementation of the 2008 Boumediene case.
Several judges have white-anted the precedent or spoken
out against the case, e.g. Janice Rogers Brown, perhaps the most shrill
Republican on the DC Circuit.
A new Seton
Hall University study shows that court-mandated constitutional habeas hearings
have become a sham as district court judges have been routinely overruled
by the DC Circuit using novel reasoning to usurp the district courts'
authority.
To be sure, administration apologists such as Lawfare's
Ben Wittes dispute the record.
The Congressional Research Service has just updated its
definitive summary of
current detainee law.
Now the Supreme Court has sided with the DC Circuit,
effectively repudiating the groundbreaking Boumediene decision.
The court has rejected without opinion all seven detainee
habeas denials (now
eight) appealed from the DC Circuit, plus the civil suit of Lebron/Padilla
v Rumsfeld. Scotusblog has more.
The NY Times called it a "retreat" and the LA Times, "bad judgment". Emptywheel headlined its story, "SCOTUS kills habeas corpus".
It's a significant setback for the rule of law, no matter who wins the next election and what changes occur in the composition of the court.
The NY Times called it a "retreat" and the LA Times, "bad judgment". Emptywheel headlined its story, "SCOTUS kills habeas corpus".
It's a significant setback for the rule of law, no matter who wins the next election and what changes occur in the composition of the court.
Marjorie
Cohn and Steve
Vladeck comment.
The unrepentant DC Circuit quickly added to the despair by its decision in the case of Doe v Rumsfeld involving a US citizen who says he was detained and mistreated by the US in Iraq.
The unrepentant DC Circuit quickly added to the despair by its decision in the case of Doe v Rumsfeld involving a US citizen who says he was detained and mistreated by the US in Iraq.
The DC panel had no problem with that as long as it was a
"war zone".
Jurist has more.
Nevertheless, the Abu Ghraib torture case has gone against corporate mercenaries in the newly progressive 4th Circuit. More here.
Jurist has more.
Nevertheless, the Abu Ghraib torture case has gone against corporate mercenaries in the newly progressive 4th Circuit. More here.
Prof Vladeck, the token progressive at the
terror-hysteric "national security" website Lawfare, has more.
Article originally appeared
on Justinian: Australian legal magazine. News on lawyers and the law (http://www.justinian.com.au/).
See website for complete
article licensing information.
No comments:
Post a Comment