Chalk one up for the Constitution
This morning, the US Supreme Court handed down its decision in Boumediene v. Bush, holding that Guantanamo detainees have the right to challenge their detention in US civilian courts. As SCOTUSblog said:
The Court, dividing 5-4, ruled that Congress had not validly taken away habeas rights. If Congress wishes to suspend habeas, it must do so only as the Constitution allows — when the country faces rebellion or invasion.
[...]
The Court also declared that detainees do not have to go through the special civilian court review process that Congress created in 2005, since that is not an adequate substitute for habeas rights. The Court refused to interpret the Detainee Treatment Act — as the Bush Administration had suggested — to include enough legal protection to make it an adequate replacement for habeas. Congress, it concluded, unconstitutionally suspended the writ in enacting that Act.
Respect for the rule of law and for this nation's founding principles may be making a comeback, albeit at the sometimes glacial pace of the court system. This is made abundantly clear by Justice Kennedy's statement in the decision (PDF is here):
To hold that the political branches may switch the Constitution on or off at will would lead to a regime in which they, not this Court, say "what the law is." ... These concerns have particular bearing upon the Suspension Clause question here, for the habeas writ is itself an indispensable mechanism for monitoring the separation of powers.
After nearly seven years of official lawlessness in the White House and spineless capitulation by a timid and weak Congress, we may be witnessing a renaissance of respect for this country's fundamental essence.