Ellen Andersen

Long Live Justice Stevens

Filed By Ellen Andersen | June 29, 2006 3:14 PM | comments

Filed in: Media

The Supreme Court has just handed down Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, ruling that the military tribunals established by the Bush administration violate both U.S. military law and the Geneva Conventions (which, as a treaty, has the same legal status as the Constitution.) Score one for the preservation of civil liberties! As Justice Stevens put it, "Even assuming that Hamden is a dangerous individual who would cause great harm or death to innocent civilians given the opportunity, the Executive nevertheless must comply with the prevailing rule of law in undertaking to try him and subject him to criminal punishment."

The case was decided by a vote of 5-3 (CJ Roberts didn't participate because he was part of the federal appeals court that had earlier rejected Hamdan's challenge.) The majority was comprised of Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Kennedy. Scalia, Thomas, and Alito dissented.

The case is important because it sets a limit on executive authority, even during times of war. However, it also tells us much about this Supreme Court. First, it emphasizes the importance of Justice Kennedy. In short, as goes Kennedy, so goes the Court. From the perspective of lgbt rights, this isn't a bad thing. Justice Kennedy penned both Romer v. Evans (striking down Colorado's antigay initiative) and Lawrence v. Texas (striking down Texas's sodomy laws). At the same time, it's pretty clear that Kennedy is more conservative on most legal measures than O'Connor was and that the gravity of the Court has shifted to the right. Hamdan also suggests that concerns that Alito would be exteremely deferential to executive authority have some merit. He seems firmly ensconced in the Scalia-Thomas-Roberts wing of the Supreme Court. This deference to executive authority matters, because questions concerning its boundaries (warrentless wiretaps, anyone?) are likely to come before the Supreme Court quite frequently in upcoming years.

President's Bush's nominations to the Court have clearly pushed it to the right, leaving four reliably anti-individual rights votes, four reliably pro-individual rights votes, and Justice Kennedy, vacilating between the two camps. So long live Justice Stevens, who at 86 is the oldest member of the Court (both chronologically and in length of service) and by most measurements its most liberal member. May his health remain hale and his mind spry. Because we certainly need him to remain on this Court for the next two years.

Leave a comment

We want to know your opinion on this issue! While arguing about an opinion or idea is encouraged, personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please be respectful of others.

The editorial team will delete a comment that is off-topic, abusive, exceptionally incoherent, includes a slur or is soliciting and/or advertising. Repeated violations of the policy will result in revocation of your user account. Please keep in mind that this is our online home; ill-mannered house guests will be shown the door.

Truer words were never spoken. I pray for his health!

As much of a relief this decision is--and it is--the Court's decision yesterday declining to overturn DeLay's off-year, power-grab gerrymandering was profoundly disappointing. The statement issued by the American Values Alliance pretty well sums it up; that statement is at www.valuesalliance.org.

Marla R. Stevens | June 30, 2006 12:21 AM

So true, Sheila! Its only saving grace was that they didn't use it as an excuse to cream the Voting Rights Act, which was definitely a part of DeLay's nefarious plan.

Today's decision was similarly limited -- in this case to just one of three military court options previously open to the HWCIC (Head War Criminal In Charge)-- but Ellen's right that the big news was that the court cut the Chimperor down to size at all.

I'll pray with y'all. Between the three of us, we have at least three of the major religions covered!