Darts and Laurels
subscribe  |    email  |    print
To the Supreme Court

For its decision in the Hamdan v. Rumsfeld case. As correct as the court was to limit executive “emergency” powers as a matter of U.S. law, its introduction of Article 3 of the Geneva Convention into the issue was a huge mistake and reflected a deep misunderstanding of the nature of the conflict. There were a number of leaps of logic in Justice John Paul Stevens’ plurality opinion, but the most egregious was to translate Article 3 as applicable to international terrorism, where the text says plainly that it covers wars “not of an international character” — in other words, internal civil wars. Moreover, to consider that provisions intended to cover non-combatants to Hamdan, who was the driver for Osama bin Laden, would be to regard Gen. George Casey’s driver as a non-combatant. The Congress needs not only to limit the powers of the executive but to constrain policymaking by the judiciary.

  email  |    print  |    continue the debate
YOUR VIEWS
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Read our letters to the editor.
SEND A LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Tell us what you think.
HOW TO SUBMIT AN ARTICLE TO AFJ
Interested in writing an opinion piece for the magazine? Read our guidelines
Subscribe  |  Renew  |  Customer Service  |  Advertising  |  Contact Us
For inquiries about reproduction or distribution of any materials contained herein, please click here.
Gannett
All content © 2012, Armed Forces Journal