- Agrarianism
- American History
- American Political Tradition
- Christendom and Western Civilization
- Classical and Medieval History
- Conservatism and the Old Right
- Culture Wars
- Foreign Affairs
- Liberty Library
- Old Republic
- Political Economy
- U.S. National Politics
- create content
- weblinks
- Recent posts
- News aggregator
Prisoners’ Dilemma: Indefinite detention of terrorist suspects poses a challenge to America's most valuable legal traditions
Submitted by Cato the Younger on Mon, 2006-12-18 15:10.
Prisoners’ Dilemma: Indefinite detention of terrorist suspects poses a challenge to America’s most valuable legal traditions
by Gerald J. Russello, The American Conservative, December 18, 2006 Issue
Copyright © 2006 The American Conservative.
The recently enacted Military Commissions Act and the Supreme Court Hamdi and Hamdan decisions, which tried to limit the suspension of the protections of habeas corpus, have spurred a new series of debates on the somewhat technical legal area of habeas corpus. The Great Writ, as it was known, stands for a very simple principle: power does not trump. A government may wish to detain someone secretly, perhaps indefinitely, and may believe it has good reasons to do so, but in the Anglo-American legal tradition, that is not good enough. As the Supreme Court stated in 1969, the writ is “the fundamental instrument for safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary and lawless state action.” The government therefore has to “produce the body for examination,” as the translation of the full Latin tag put it, before a magistrate and justify the reasons for the person’s detention.
Click here for the full article and please consider ordering a subscription to the American Conservative.
Copyright © 2006 The American Conservative.
The recently enacted Military Commissions Act and the Supreme Court Hamdi and Hamdan decisions, which tried to limit the suspension of the protections of habeas corpus, have spurred a new series of debates on the somewhat technical legal area of habeas corpus. The Great Writ, as it was known, stands for a very simple principle: power does not trump. A government may wish to detain someone secretly, perhaps indefinitely, and may believe it has good reasons to do so, but in the Anglo-American legal tradition, that is not good enough. As the Supreme Court stated in 1969, the writ is “the fundamental instrument for safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary and lawless state action.” The government therefore has to “produce the body for examination,” as the translation of the full Latin tag put it, before a magistrate and justify the reasons for the person’s detention.Click here for the full article and please consider ordering a subscription to the American Conservative.
