Court rules against govt restrictions in detainee cases.
By on Jul 20th, 2007 at 6:39 pm
Court rules against govt restrictions in detainee cases.
In a unanimous decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit “rejected the Bush administration’s plan to limit what judges and the detainees’ attorneys can review” when Guantanamo Bay detainees challenge their status as “enemy combatants.” “The court has resoundingly rejected the government’s effort to control the record and to limit an investigation into the truth,” said Sabin Willet, the attorney who argued the case for the detainees.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Health Care
Hoffman
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
And the judges were appointed by Clinton, Reagan, and Bush Sr. How’s that for fair and balanced?
July 20th, 2007 at 6:45 pmLike the Bush Administration cares what some Court says!
July 20th, 2007 at 6:46 pmThese must be the “librul activist judges” presidente dipshit talks about ad nauseum.
July 20th, 2007 at 6:48 pmWe shouldn’t be fighting a war in the courts.
July 20th, 2007 at 6:49 pmWhere’s that John D. Bates when you need him?
lol
July 20th, 2007 at 6:50 pmmy god, i’m grasping at straws…! our democratic, constitutional republic is on fire, no one has yet called the fire department, and here i am, taking consolation that one court has ruled against the criminal bush administration on one point… just says how desperate i am for any good news…
And, yes, I DO take it personally
July 20th, 2007 at 6:50 pmValerie Plame’s lawsuit was dismissed because it was without merit.
July 20th, 2007 at 6:52 pmJudges? We don’t need no stinkin’ judges…
July 20th, 2007 at 6:52 pmWe definitely shouldn’t be fighting a “war” in the courts. And had the Bush administration chosen to live within the constraints of the U.S. Constitution and international treaties we signed, we wouldn’t have had to fight a “war” in the courts. But since Bush chose to believe he was above such things, we have no choice.
July 20th, 2007 at 6:52 pm“Valerie Plame’s lawsuit was dismissed because it was without merit.”
Nope. The judge refused to rule on the merits.
July 20th, 2007 at 6:53 pmValerie Plame’s lawsuit was dismissed because it was without merit.
Comment by The Captain
And perhaps you’re hoping that it established some sort of legal precedent that will overturn this ruling? Please attempt to make some sort of rational comment when posting.
July 20th, 2007 at 6:53 pmThank goodness….
July 20th, 2007 at 6:54 pmNope. The judge refused to rule on the merits.
Comment by PaulB
Careful, PaulB, or you’ll confuse the lad with little details like “technical legality”…
July 20th, 2007 at 6:55 pmThis wasn’t a complete win. The court left in place restrictions like: “detainees and their lawyers must limit communications to events leading up to a detainee’s capture and the conduct of CSRT proceedings relating to the detainee.”
Man, I hope the U.S. Supreme Court rules that the habeas corpus restrictions passed by Congress were unconstitutional. We need our country back.
July 20th, 2007 at 6:55 pmCue… 3… 2… 1…
“God-damned activist judges!!!”
(Pssst… Clinton did it too!!!)
July 20th, 2007 at 6:56 pmOne small step for the Rule of Law, one giant boot up BushCo’s ASS!!!
July 20th, 2007 at 6:56 pmWe shouldn’t be fighting a war in the courts.
Comment by The Captain
Exactly, but King George doesn’t want the grownups to make sure he doesn’t destroy whats left of our country and it’s rule of law – so I guess a court is the best place to be. Sad, but true. Seems like some here really want a monarch in charge.
July 20th, 2007 at 7:03 pmWe shouldn’t be fighting a war in the courts.
Comment by The Captain — July 20, 2007 @ 6:49 pm
No, we shouldn’t. But this administration forces it by flaunting the law.
July 20th, 2007 at 7:05 pm“Valerie Plame’s lawsuit was dismissed because it was without merit.
Comment by The Captain — July 20, 2007 @ 6:52 pm”
Just like your post is being dismissed because it is without merit. Try thinking for yourself next time.
July 20th, 2007 at 7:05 pmNope. The judge refused to rule on the merits.
Comment by PaulB
Correct. The judge only ruled on the jurisdictional points of the case – not the merits of the case. Doesn’t anybody who licks Bush’s boots read at all! Reading is a wonderful skill to have. I highly recommend it.
July 20th, 2007 at 7:05 pmWe shouldn’t be fighting a war in the courts.
Comment by The Captain
But that’s what tennis, squash, and racketball are, Captain, WAR! Oh wait, you said “IN the courts”, not “on” them. Sorry, my bad. Bumble on, sir, bumble on.
July 20th, 2007 at 7:06 pmthe Bush administration’s plan to limit what judges and the detainees’ attorneys can review
For what ever reason would the Bush Ad want to limit what judges and the detainees’ attorneys can review …. ?? Naw.. couldn’t be illegal acts torture, obscenity, filth and unnatural acts of some sort….
July 20th, 2007 at 7:07 pmDoesn’t anybody who licks Bush’s boots read at all! Reading is a wonderful skill to have. I highly recommend it.
Comment by Tom
They only look at the pictures, Tom, until the pages get stuck together.
July 20th, 2007 at 7:07 pmLike the Bush Administration cares what some Court says!
Comment by Egreggious — July 20, 2007 @ 6:46 pm
WHO GIVES A SHIT ABOUT AMERICA ANYMORE
July 20th, 2007 at 7:09 pmjust says how desperate i am for any good news…
Comment by profmarcus — July 20, 2007 @ 6:50 pm
thinking the same thing…
July 20th, 2007 at 7:25 pmfinally some ‘good news’…
oy…
They only look at the pictures, Tom, until the pages get stuck together.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity
Ewwwwww! I really did not need that visual right now. But funny!
July 20th, 2007 at 7:28 pmThey only look at the pictures, Tom, until the pages get stuck together.
Actually, they don’t even have to look at pictures. They just listen to Limpballs and Insanity on the radio. That’s enough to get them creaming their jeans while they soak up their masters’ talking points.
July 20th, 2007 at 7:29 pmThat’s enough to get them creaming their jeans while they soak up their masters’ talking points.
Comment by Tom
Getting even w/ me? My lunch just voted for a complete withdrawal from my stocmach. Thanks alot.
July 20th, 2007 at 7:33 pmGreat! The Left is at it again, emboldening the enemy!!!
July 20th, 2007 at 7:34 pmLOL… Don’t you just love how judges appointed by conservative presidents, not to mention 60-70% of the country, are now called “The Left?” Man, our trolls aren’t even trying to make sense anymore. Poor guys…
July 20th, 2007 at 7:38 pmGreat! The Left is at it again, emboldening the enemy!!!
Comment by Mr. President
Pssst, Mr P… Ringo was looking for you earlier. Said it’s a go at the poolhouse, 6ish…
July 20th, 2007 at 7:42 pmWHO GIVES A SHIT ABOUT AMERICA ANYMORE
Comment by Sanjay — July 20, 2007 @ 7:09 pm
We true Americans do — not this government or it’s apologists.
July 20th, 2007 at 9:16 pmUnfortunately, he can still appeal. And they’ve stacked SCOTUS.
The idea of trail without benefit of legal representation or access to the evidence against you (even though much of it may have been obtained from informants wanting to gather a reward and/or statements of others made under torture) is so repugnant !
July 20th, 2007 at 9:52 pmComment by MapleStreet
Trial by secret evidence you’re not allowed to see? Geez, are we back in the Middle Ages? I’m surprised the Busites can even say these things w/ a straight face, and that even 19% of the country still supports this insanity.
BTW, where’s Larry Flynt w/ his “Shocking Discovery”. We’ve got a bunch of bets waiting on that news.
July 20th, 2007 at 10:03 pmMapleStreet commented: “Trial by secret evidence you’re not allowed to see? Geez, are we back in the Middle Ages?”
No we’re in the Rich Peoples Republic from which we must ex-Scaife!
July 20th, 2007 at 11:28 pmFunny how this item is right next to the item about John Bates. I guess this court hasn’t been bought and paid for by the Bushies yet. It gives me hope that there are still a few pockets of reasonability left in our court system.
July 21st, 2007 at 12:00 am