Boumediene Argument Round-Up
Press
- The latest report from the AP’s Mark Sherman can be found here.
- The latest report from Reuters’ Randall Mikkelsen can be found here.
- A report from Bloomberg’s Greg Stohr can be found here.
- A report from the Los Angeles Times’ David Savage can be found here.
- A report from the Washington Post’s Robert Barnes can be found here.
- A report from USA Today’s Joan Biskupic can be found here.
- A report from The Wall Street Journal’s Jess Bravin can be found here.
- A report from the New York Times’ Linda Greenhouse can be found here.
- A report from the Chicago Tribune’s James Oliphant can be found here.
- An audio report from Slate’s Dahlia Lithwick on NPR can be found here.
- A report from Legal Times’ Tony Mauro can be found here.
- A report from NPR’s Nina Totenberg can be found here.
________
Blogs
- Orin Kerr’s post on the Volokh Conspiracy can be found here.
- Marty Lederman’s post on Balkinization can be found here.
- Roger Alford’s post on Opinio Juris can be found here.
________
1:07: Audio of the oral argument has now concluded on C-SPAN3. is available here.
1:00: Seth Waxman, the detainees’ lawyer, has begun his rebuttal on the C-SPAN feed (links below).
12:18: Solicitor General Paul Clement has now begun his portion of the argument on the C-SPAN feed (links below).
11:43: Audio of the oral argument has now begun on C-SPAN3. The streaming web cast can be accessed here (Windows Media Player) or here (RealPlayer). The oral argument is also being broadcast on C-SPAN Radio, which is DC 90.1 FM and XM Channel 132.
What I found revealing is Kennedy’s asking of Clement what appeared to be a skeptical question on the administrative procedures implementing the Military Commissions Act (MCA): ” … Your position is that we (the U.S. Supreme Court) have no jurisdiction here,” as the Congress and Executive branches have already spoken on the matter with the enactment of the MCA which bars federal courts from hearing detainee appeals, in what appears to be one very weak aspect of the Bush administration’s case.
The capacity of the Congress and Executive branch to simply declare that the U.S. Court system may not rule on a legislative act flies in the face of centuries of American jurisprudence.
Will the SC rule they have no right to hear the case? No.
Is the MCA an adequate substitue for habeas? Hard to see how Kennedy can say ‘yes’.
Funny how Justice Clarence Thomas, in keeping with his habits during oral arguments and what some observers see as a lack of legal curiosity, asked not a single question in this possible landmark case.
###
Comment by Michael Leon — December 5, 2007 @ 1:58 pm