Supreme Court Rules Guantanamo Detainees Have Constitutional Right To Challenge Detention

MARK SHERMAN | June 12, 2008 11:19 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »
I Like ItI Don’t Like It
In this May 15, 2007 file photo that was reviewed by the U.S. Military, a detainee, center, is escorted by U.S. military personnel at the detention facility on Guantanamo Bay U.S. Naval Base in Cuba. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday, June 12, 2008, that foreign terrorism suspects held at Guantanamo Bay have rights under the Constitution to challenge their detention in U.S. civilian courts. (AP Photo/Brennan Linsley, File)

WASHINGTON — In a stinging rebuke to President Bush's anti-terror policies, a deeply divided Supreme Court ruled Thursday that foreign detainees held for years at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba have the right to appeal to U.S. civilian courts to challenge their indefinite imprisonment without charges.

Bush said he strongly disagreed with the decision _ the third time the court has repudiated him on the detainees _ and suggested he might seek yet another law to keep terror suspects locked up at the prison camp, even as his presidency winds down.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the 5-4 high court majority, acknowledged the terrorism threat the U.S. faces _ the administration's justification for the detentions _ but he declared, "The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times."

In a blistering dissent, Justice Antonin Scalia said the decision "will make the war harder on us. It will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed."

Bush has argued the detentions are needed to protect the nation in a time of unprecedented threats from al-Qaida and other foreign terrorist groups. The president, in Rome, said Thursday, "It was a deeply divided court, and I strongly agree with those who dissented." He said he would consider whether to seek new laws in light of the ruling "so we can safely say to the American people, 'We're doing everything we can to protect you.'"

Kennedy said federal judges could ultimately order some detainees to be released, but he also said such orders would depend on security concerns and other circumstances. The ruling itself won't result in any immediate releases.

The decision also cast doubt on the future of the military war crimes trials that 19 detainees, including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other alleged Sept. 11 plotters, are facing so far. The Pentagon has said it plans to try as many as 80 men held at Guantanamo.

Lawyers for detainees differed over whether the ruling, unlike the first two, would lead to prompt hearings for those who have not been charged. Roughly 270 men remain at the prison at the U.S. naval base in Cuba. Most are classed as enemy combatants and held on suspicion of terrorism or links to al-Qaida and the Taliban.

Story continues below

Some detainee lawyers said hearings could take place within a few months. But James Cohen, a Fordham University law professor who has two clients at Guantanamo, predicted Bush would continue seeking ways to resist the ruling. "Nothing is going to happen between June 12 and Jan. 20," when the next president takes office, Cohen said.

Roughly 200 detainees have lawsuits on hold in federal court in Washington. Chief Judge Royce C. Lamberth said he would call a special meeting of federal judges to address how to handle the cases.

Detainees already facing trial are in a different category.

Justice Department spokesman Peter Carr said Thursday's decision should not affect war crimes trials. "Military commission trials will therefore continue to go forward," Carr said.

The lawyer for Salim Ahmed Hamdan, Osama bin Laden's one-time driver, said he will seek dismissal of the charges against Hamdan based on the new ruling. A military judge had already delayed the trial's start to await the high court ruling.

It was unclear whether a hearing at Guantanamo for Canadian Omar Khadr, charged with killing a U.S. Special Forces soldier in Afghanistan, would go forward next week as planned.

Charles Swift, the former Navy lawyer who used to represent Hamdan, said he believes the court removed any legal basis for keeping the Guantanamo facility open and that the military tribunals are "doomed."

Guantanamo generally and the tribunals were conceived on the idea that "constitutional protections wouldn't apply," Swift said. "The court said the Constitution applies. They're in big trouble."

Human rights groups and many Democratic members of Congress celebrated the ruling as affirming the nation's commitment to the rule of law. Several Republican lawmakers called it a decision that put foreign terrorists' rights above the safety of the American people.

The administration opened the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to hold enemy combatants, people suspected of ties to al-Qaida or the Taliban.

The prison has been harshly criticized at home and abroad for the detentions themselves and the aggressive interrogations that were conducted there.

At its heart, the 70-page ruling says that the detainees have the same rights as anyone else in custody in the United States to contest their detention before a judge. Kennedy also said the system the administration has put in place to classify detainees as enemy combatants and review those decisions is not an adequate substitute for the right to go before a civilian judge.

The administration had argued first that the detainees have no rights. But it also contended that the classification and review process was sufficient.

Chief Justice John Roberts, in his own dissent to Thursday's ruling, criticized the majority for striking down what he called "the most generous set of procedural protections ever afforded aliens detained by this country as enemy combatants."

Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas also dissented.

Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, David Souter and John Paul Stevens _ the court's more liberal members _ joined Kennedy to form the majority.

Souter wrote a separate opinion in which he emphasized the length of the detentions.

"A second fact insufficiently appreciated by the dissents is the length of the disputed imprisonments; some of the prisoners represented here today having been locked up for six years," Souter said. "Hence the hollow ring when the dissenters suggest that the court is somehow precipitating the judiciary into reviewing claims that the military ... could handle within some reasonable period of time."

Scalia, citing a report by Senate Republicans, said at least 30 prisoners have returned to the battlefield following their release from Guantanamo.

The court has ruled twice previously that people held at Guantanamo without charges can go into civilian courts to ask that the government justify their continued detention. Each time, the administration and Congress, then controlled by Republicans, changed the law to try to close the courthouse doors to the detainees.

The court specifically struck down a provision of the Military Commissions Act of 2006 that denies Guantanamo detainees the right to file petitions of habeas corpus. Habeas corpus is a centuries-old legal principle, enshrined in the Constitution, that allows courts to determine whether a prisoner is being held illegally.

The head of the New York-based Center for Constitutional Rights, which represents dozens of prisoners at Guantanamo, welcomed the ruling.

"The Supreme Court has finally brought an end to one of our nation's most egregious injustices," said CCR Executive Director Vincent Warren. "By granting the writ of habeas corpus, the Supreme Court recognizes a rule of law established hundreds of years ago and essential to American jurisprudence since our nation's founding."

Bush has said he wants to close the facility once countries can be found to take the prisoners who are there.

Presidential candidates John McCain and Barack Obama also support shutting down the prison.

WASHINGTON — In a stinging rebuke to President Bush's anti-terror policies, a deeply divided Supreme Court ruled Thursday that foreign detainees held for years at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba have the...
WASHINGTON — In a stinging rebuke to President Bush's anti-terror policies, a deeply divided Supreme Court ruled Thursday that foreign detainees held for years at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba have the...
Filed by Nick Graham  |  Report Corrections
 
Comments
848
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next › Last » (19 pages total)
- joetrade I'm a Fan of joetrade 4 fans permalink

The greatest danger facing this country since it's founding has and is being perpetrated by the war criminals in the present administration and their supporters in the Congress and the cowardly newscasters on the major networks.Anyone watching CNN in 2001,&2002 could easily ascertain that the whack job ideologues in the WH were going to war.They presented one lie after another and went unchallenged by the so called free press in this country.Instead of a massive outrage of their actions the mainstream media rolled over and played dead.I cannot remember a single broadcaster who had the guts to question the illegal acts committed by this bunch of thugs.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:50 PM on 06/12/2008
- SmellyOne I'm a Fan of SmellyOne 28 fans permalink
photo

Your perspective is seems narrow.

How can you argue that the "present administration" is the "greatest danger facing this country since it's founding"?

Have you heard of the Civil War?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:04 PM on 06/12/2008
photo

These guys trump the civil war.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:34 PM on 06/12/2008
- VicPerry I'm a Fan of VicPerry 6 fans permalink

Sorry smelly one, you're so very right. I see bumpersticker possibilities here: NEO-CONS - NOT AS BAD AS THE CIVIL WAR

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:41 PM on 06/12/2008

It's easier to undermine the constitution than to lose a civil war.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:48 PM on 06/12/2008
- Ping I'm a Fan of Ping 63 fans permalink

War Crimes. They must be charged with war crimes.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:44 PM on 06/12/2008

I agree! Bush, Cheney, Libby, Rove, Rice, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz all need to be charged and tried for war crimes.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:04 PM on 06/12/2008

Most definitely

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:46 PM on 06/12/2008
photo

We need to expand the Supreme Court, desperately.

Frankly it makes me sick that 9 people are determining penultimate legal decisions for citizens and non citizens.

They made the right decision today, but only by one vote.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:34 PM on 06/12/2008
- donaldw6 I'm a Fan of donaldw6 357 fans permalink
photo

We need to impeach a few justices. I know, what are the chances? But it's got to be said.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:44 PM on 06/12/2008

Of the 100s of people tried and convicted at the Nuremberg war crimes trials, 10 out of 16 judges were convicted.

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/nuremberg/nuremberg.htm

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:29 PM on 06/12/2008
- plainsman I'm a Fan of plainsman 17 fans permalink
photo

We don't want to go there. We just need Obama in office so that more liberal (or moderate) justices are appointed during the next 8 yrs. The SCOTUS needs to be balanced, not weighted heavily towards one viewpoint.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:36 PM on 06/12/2008
photo

SCOTUS13 and reassign the Chief Justice roll to someone to the right of Ginsberg.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:50 PM on 06/12/2008
photo

The Chief Justice is appointed to the position, and only his resignation or impeachment and conviction can remove him as Chief Justice.

Try studying the law and the rules.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:57 PM on 06/12/2008

Roberts was confirmed as CHIEF Justice.

The role can not be reassigned.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:59 PM on 06/12/2008
- Gordon I'm a Fan of Gordon 30 fans permalink
photo

Roberts is to the right of Ginsburg.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:24 PM on 06/12/2008
photo

It'll never happen.

Roosevelt tried it in the 30s, and it failed miserably.
It also weakened him politically during his second term.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:55 PM on 06/12/2008
photo

FDR tried doing that & was shot down for the effort.

(BTW... "penultimate" means "next to the last")

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:58 PM on 06/12/2008
- Meah I'm a Fan of Meah 52 fans permalink
photo

Bush v Gore. Ah, yes. 9 people. Such decisions would be ultimate, not penultimate.. No place else to go. Just look at the last 7 years. They made the wrong decision, but only by one vote. Depending on what side you are on.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:35 PM on 06/12/2008

One of the things I get a kick out of is the GOP always talks about "judicial activism" and how judges should only rule on the letter of the law.

Yet any time you see a split Supreme Court decision, it's always Scalia, Alito, Roberts and Thomas on one side and Souter, Ginsberg, Breyer, Stevens on the other side with Kennedy being the tiebreaker.

Doesn't seem like anybody is ruling on the "letter of the law", seems they like to rule on personal beliefs. So in essence, all of them except for Kennedy are "activist judges"

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:26 PM on 06/12/2008
- oafishcad I'm a Fan of oafishcad 46 fans permalink

Souter sometimes is a swing vote, as was O'Conner when she was there. It isn't necessarily that the two groups are being "activist" but that they disagree on the purpose of the Constitution and the purpose of the United States of America.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:13 PM on 06/12/2008
- SmellyOne I'm a Fan of SmellyOne 28 fans permalink
photo

Checks and Balances.

You don't see that in a Fascist State.

Believe in America. We are never at our worst for long.


PEACE.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:24 PM on 06/12/2008
photo

We WILL be at our worst so long as the neocons are in power.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:32 PM on 06/12/2008
- piquet I'm a Fan of piquet 14 fans permalink
photo

Too bad all the half dead ones are "liberal"(rational).

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:45 PM on 06/12/2008
- oafishcad I'm a Fan of oafishcad 46 fans permalink

And with a MCCain Presidency, we can have a glorious Supreme Court all of one mind.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:14 PM on 06/12/2008
- AdamX I'm a Fan of AdamX 13 fans permalink

Just one more right wing nut on the supreme court and you would be whistling a different tune. The senate and congress have barely challenged Bush's facist regime. All he has to do is declare a state of emergency, and we'll be in it even deeper.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:46 PM on 06/12/2008
- SmellyOne I'm a Fan of SmellyOne 28 fans permalink
photo

Your glass is half empty.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:59 PM on 06/12/2008
photo

Allah willing!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:51 PM on 06/12/2008

what? the hand picked supreme court isnt playing along??

good. i am all for sentencing those that intended to or have attacked us. but we CANNOT disregard the Constitution under any circumstances. our laws and there equal application of those laws, even to our enemies, it was sets us apart. or should i say, what used to set us apart. our Constitution has been used as toilet paper for the past nearly 8 years, its time it is removed from the crapper and placed back in control.

impeach
war crimes
prison

Obama 08

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:23 PM on 06/12/2008

Actually the Bush 'hand-picked' elements did oppose: Alito and Roberts along with Thomas and Scalia. That is why it is so important to defeat McCain. He would likely have the opportunity to appoint the fifth conservative to the Supreme Court.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:46 PM on 06/12/2008
- springsm I'm a Fan of springsm 55 fans permalink

Yes, bush handpicked these people (and the other bush) to keep on protecting illegal activities, not to speak of his freedom. And they did not disappoint..they voted for bush on this one. Everybody should read toobin's book, THE NINE. We must keep our fingers crossed that bush does not get to assign another ninny and that mccain does NOT get the chance. That is really scary. And bush said that they would do everything they could to legislate something that would counter act this action of the Supreme Ct. Bush has to prove his legacy was worth it doncha know.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:07 PM on 06/12/2008
photo

This was a narrow victory for America

and a dire warning for our future!!!!!!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:50 PM on 06/12/2008

Our illustrious President says he will abide by the Supreme Court ruling but to quote him, " It dudn't mean I have to agree with it." Who better to know about a "dudn't" that a dud.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:22 PM on 06/12/2008
- MetryJen I'm a Fan of MetryJen 3 fans permalink

It's about freaking time.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:19 PM on 06/12/2008
- Roxanna I'm a Fan of Roxanna 35 fans permalink

IT'S ABOUT TIME!!!

People need to start thinking about the SOUL OF AMERICA and what we stand for..

How the world views us...

I am shamed of this Administration disregard for human rights and IGNORING our own constitution for their personal agenda.! When you think that 1 million Iraqis have perished/ been killed directly due to us and that 99 percent of them were innocent ... How can anyone feel good about that? We have brought much harm and things have a way of coming around even for America.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:18 PM on 06/12/2008
- SmellyOne I'm a Fan of SmellyOne 28 fans permalink
photo

I don't think that keeping detainees at Guantonamo is part of anyone's "personal agenda".

I think the "agenda" is American Safety, and that is a tactic. It may be a bad tactic, but it's not done for "personal" reasons.

Unless I'm missing something... What is it the amin. has "personally" against the detainees?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:32 PM on 06/12/2008
- donaldw6 I'm a Fan of donaldw6 357 fans permalink
photo

I don't think it's American safety at all. I think it's intimidation, and not just of the terrorists. It's intimidation of us.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:51 PM on 06/12/2008
photo

No.

Gitmo was set up ouside our borders so as to skirt US law.

Didn't work, did it?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:00 PM on 06/12/2008
- soapington I'm a Fan of soapington 42 fans permalink
photo

I believe the thing they REALLY hate about the detainees is that most of them have done nothing wrong.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:08 PM on 06/12/2008
- KOisGod I'm a Fan of KOisGod 347 fans permalink
photo

And so what did the Nazi's have "personally against the Jews? Unfortunately for them, they found themselves as part of the "final solution."

You'd have been a good little German

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:23 PM on 06/12/2008
- Meah I'm a Fan of Meah 52 fans permalink
photo

Vengeance o smelly one, vengeance. Big time and without mercy. The mentality is vengeful.
You think torture is not personal? Come out of the clouds! The Iraqis were punished for 911. Doncha think? Not personal? Please. I suppose it would not be personal if you are without conscience. There could be a case made for that. OMG. The founding fathers would be screaming at the goings on in the last seven years, and the Congressional reaction to all of it!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:42 PM on 06/12/2008

99% of them? try ALL of them!

the only thing that the Iraqis are guilty of is sitting on the world's 2nd largest supply of oil and of getting in the way of american bombs

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:41 PM on 06/12/2008
- bethinCary I'm a Fan of bethinCary 9 fans permalink

Yay SCOTUS!!

Now about those 4th amendment/civil liberties and wiretapping V FISA....

Bu thank you...it's a step in the right direction that I can begin to have faith in govt. again..
(and as soon as GW/Cheney are gone)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:15 PM on 06/12/2008
- darthdarcy I'm a Fan of darthdarcy 48 fans permalink
photo

So Justice Kennedy broke with the rest of The Federalist Society members on this one this time but we can see how dangerous it is to have this cabal of corrupt dishonest Judges and lawyers whose first loyalty is to this dark collaboration of Troy's infesting both our Federal Courts as well as our Justice Dept. which they have already brought to such ridicule disrepute and disdain as ever before...!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:13 PM on 06/12/2008

The activist judges are the ideological Neo-Federalist whom do not seem to understand what the rule of law means. When Scalia in reference to the 2,000 elections, which basically circumvented our democratic process, commented to Leslie Stahl, to get over it, his credibility collapsed in front of our eyes. In response to another reasonable question, Scalia glared at her and stated, “It’s my view and I’m right” a response a spoiled 5-year child would give.

“It’s my view and I’m right” is not an explanation for a legal decision. If a Supreme Court justice is so arrogant and partisan not to at least attempt a rational explanation for a legal decision that the public who pays his salary can understand, than he is not fit to wear the robe. We are not living in Hitler’s Germany, when judges were loyal to one political party and a right wing ideology; the fact is we are the country gave these judges a fair trial at Nuremberg when the Soviets wanted to line them up and shoot them. The same 4 justices make their minds up before the case is even heard, they never surprise us, because of their inability to break from their Federalist ideology, which was the anti democratic for runner of the Republican party.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:22 PM on 06/12/2008
- darthdarcy I'm a Fan of darthdarcy 48 fans permalink
photo

If you knew what I know personally of Samuel Alito through experience of how corrupt and what a liar he is you'd be even more concerned..

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:59 PM on 06/12/2008
- urbangreen I'm a Fan of urbangreen 7 fans permalink

Our national nightmare is coming to an end and we are re-joining the league of civilized nations. Thank you Justices Stevens, Souter, Ginsberg, Bryer and Kennedy for upholding the rule of law!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:13 PM on 06/12/2008
- springsm I'm a Fan of springsm 55 fans permalink

Yes, but one more bush suprerior court judge could wreck the courts/constitution/torture/habeas corpus laws forever and ever permanently. I wonder if the likes of Alito and Roberts have any idea what could happen to their own young children through their narrow minded, conservative and dispicable ACTIVIST rulings.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:12 PM on 06/12/2008
photo

libs = kooks See Profile I'm a Fan of libs = kooks

You hippie libs will be mad, not all those detained at gitmo will get their day in court on our soil, many of those released from gitmo continue to resume killing themselves and civilians in suicide bombings.

===========================

You really are stuck in the 60s.
And not in a good way.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:11 PM on 06/12/2008
- soapington I'm a Fan of soapington 42 fans permalink
photo

You warn that "many of those released from gitmo will continue to resume killing themselves... " Good grief, these people really are invincible!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:14 PM on 06/12/2008
photo

Read it again---I was quoting "libs = kooks" who is from Wingnuttia.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:24 PM on 06/12/2008
- renoir I'm a Fan of renoir 18 fans permalink

Wait. So, let me get this straight. Protecting the Constitution is anti-American. Liberals are the enemy because they believe in the rule of law. Following sane legal courses to justice is a bad idea. Liberals will be mad if we actually prosecute criminals while freeing the innocent?

You are really stuck in neo-Fascist la-la land.
And there is no good way.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:17 PM on 06/12/2008
photo

You need to take a course in reading comprehension.

I was quoting a goofball comment by a far-right wingnut, and then commenting on it.

When in doubt, read it again, and check the profile of the person you're responding to before you embarrass yourself again.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:22 PM on 06/12/2008

Stuck in the 60's, your hnadle is stuck in the 70's, ThunderclapNewman was a one hit wonder band who produced a pretty good song which dose not apply to you.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:23 PM on 06/12/2008
- TJinSoCal I'm a Fan of TJinSoCal 5 fans permalink
photo

5-4????
That alone should scare people into electing Obama.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:09 PM on 06/12/2008
- barriosbabe I'm a Fan of barriosbabe 243 fans permalink
photo

Good point.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:53 PM on 06/12/2008
photo

Happy news. I didn't know the supremes had it in them. Gives me hope for the restoration of democracy in this country.

Can't figure, tho, what Roberts, Alito, Thomas and Scalia are thinking. These are the alleged Constitutional fundies, the original intent dudes. Perhaps they don't know habeas corpus predates that document.and the country itself. Also tell them that the founders didn't intend for citizens to provide photo ID to vote.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:04 PM on 06/12/2008
- Gordon I'm a Fan of Gordon 30 fans permalink
photo

You should tell JP Stevens about the ID thing. He's the one who wrote the opinion for the majority. You should read his opinion on the voter ID act while you are at it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:27 PM on 06/12/2008
- Ping I'm a Fan of Ping 63 fans permalink

This comment is pending approval and won't be displayed until it is approved.

Strict construction only applies when it serves their purpose.
Complete hypocrites are what they really are.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:49 PM on 06/12/2008
- Synoia I'm a Fan of Synoia 8 fans permalink

Right. 1315. Magna Carta. Runnymeade. Told King John to keep his hands off (land fee simple) that which William I 9William the Conqueror) had granted.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:07 PM on 06/12/2008
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next › Last » (19 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect