iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Obama Backs Bush On Bagram Detainees

NEDRA PICKLER and MATT APUZZO   02/20/09 07:48 PM ET   AP

Barack Obama

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration, siding with the Bush White House, contended Friday that detainees in Afghanistan have no constitutional rights.

In a two-sentence court filing, the Justice Department said it agreed that detainees at Bagram Airfield cannot use U.S. courts to challenge their detention. The filing shocked human rights attorneys.

"The hope we all had in President Obama to lead us on a different path has not turned out as we'd hoped," said Tina Monshipour Foster, a human rights attorney representing a detainee at the Bagram Airfield. "We all expected better."

The Supreme Court last summer gave al-Qaida and Taliban suspects held at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, the right to challenge their detention. With about 600 detainees at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan and thousands more held in Iraq, courts are grappling with whether they, too, can sue to be released.

Three months after the Supreme Court's ruling on Guantanamo Bay, four Afghan citizens being detained at Bagram tried to challenge their detentions in U.S. District Court in Washington. Court filings alleged that the U.S. military had held them without charges, repeatedly interrogating them without any means to contact an attorney. Their petition was filed by relatives on their behalf since they had no way of getting access to the legal system.

The military has determined that all the detainees at Bagram are "enemy combatants." The Bush administration said in a response to the petition last year that the enemy combatant status of the Bagram detainees is reviewed every six months, taking into consideration classified intelligence and testimony from those involved in their capture and interrogation.

After Barack Obama took office, a federal judge in Washington gave the new administration a month to decide whether it wanted to stand by Bush's legal argument. Justice Department spokesman Dean Boyd says the filing speaks for itself.

"They've now embraced the Bush policy that you can create prisons outside the law," said Jonathan Hafetz, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union who has represented several detainees.

The Justice Department argues that Bagram is different from Guantanamo Bay because it is in an overseas war zone and the prisoners there are being held as part of a military action. The government argues that releasing enemy combatants into the Afghan war zone, or even diverting U.S. personnel there to consider their legal cases, could threaten security.

The government also said if the Bagram detainees got access to the courts, it would allow all foreigners captured by the United States in conflicts worldwide to do the same.

It's not the first time that the Obama administration has used a Bush administration legal argument after promising to review it. Last week, Attorney General Eric Holder announced a review of every court case in which the Bush administration invoked the state secrets privilege, a separate legal tool it used to have lawsuits thrown out rather than reveal secrets.

The same day, however, Justice Department attorney Douglas Letter cited that privilege in asking an appeals court to uphold dismissal of a suit accusing a Boeing Co. subsidiary of illegally helping the CIA fly suspected terrorists to allied foreign nations that tortured them.

Letter said that Obama officials approved his argument.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration, siding with the Bush White House, contended Friday that detainees in Afghanistan have no constitutional rights. In a two-sentence court filing, the Justic...
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration, siding with the Bush White House, contended Friday that detainees in Afghanistan have no constitutional rights. In a two-sentence court filing, the Justic...
Filed by Nicholas Sabloff  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 4,664
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (64 total)
05:44 PM on 02/23/2009
I hate to see Obama lave anything Bush did in place. I believe the biggest terrorist and enemy this country has faced in a very very long time is the Bush administration. I would like to see Bush name and any reference to him or his cohorts wiped from history. I have to admit I don't know the whole story on Obama's decision to up hold a bush piece of BS. I do know the mess left by lord bush is overwhelming to say the least. If these detainees hate us to suicidal revenge I am sure in most cases that is our fault. Any animal will get mean if mistreated enough.
04:17 PM on 02/23/2009
I believe the President has made the right decision here. These prisoners are in a different situation than Gitmo.

It's amazing to me how many people are turning their backs on the Obama Presidency so soon. Have you lost faith in our great new leader so easily? Should we not be giving him the benefit of the doubt at this time and assume that the situation is more complex than we think it is?

Keep up the good work, President Obama. I for one haven't lost sight of the difficulty of the problems you much deal with. Do what you must, continue pushing ahead...

I'm starting to believe Huff Post is visited by nothing but malcontents that won't be happy no matter how the world changes.
05:15 PM on 02/23/2009
Hey Karma
The only difference betwwen Gitmo and Bagram is that the conditions at Bagram aren't as comfortable as Gitmo! Detainees have been there without charges just as long and in some cases longer!
You are like so many other Left Wing Loons on this site.. if you didn't have double standards.. you'd have none at all.
Where is the the outrage and calls for impeachment and invesstigations into "criminal" activity.

Obama's lawyers are SUPPORTING the Bush legal team's approach!! Oh my! You people with Bush Derrangement Syndrome re-define hypocrisy.

And get this.. I support Mr. Obama's decision.. he seems not to share the same self hatred, self destructive mindset I find so prevalent on this forum. If he keeps this up I might vote for him in 2012.
04:06 PM on 02/23/2009
We've got to expose globalist groups like the Trilateral Commission and their grip on American economic and foreign policy. They won't teach us about them in our schools, so it's up to us as adults to educate ourselves and our children on the mission and impact of these groups so that we can be aware of grander schemes that are shaping our collective future. These groups are not our friends and could care less about our nation's sovereignty or the workings of our democratic politcal system. Obama's complicity in this policy direction does not surprise me, this was predetermined decades ago I'm sure.
03:39 PM on 02/23/2009
Oh Obama, I held your banner high I embraced the possibilities of hope. I believed change was coming. I fear now those promises were empty vessels . "No question what had happened to the faces of the pigs. as the creatures watched from outside, they looked from the pig to the man and from man to pig and from pig to man again; already it was impossible to to tell which was which." G. Orwell, Animal Farm, ch. 10
05:37 PM on 02/23/2009
Just the basics of government and how it works could have told you what he was going to do wasn't going to work. To me that was obvious...
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
01:38 PM on 02/23/2009
They DON'T have constitutional rights! They have rights as human beings and we have the obligation to honor those rights -- but they don't have rights under the Constitution of the United States of America. Anyone who says they do doesn't know the law. So, if Obama's butt itches and he scratches it, and when Bush's butt itches HE scratches it -- does that mean Obama and Bush are JUST ALIKE? What nonsense! Obama is following the law. So far he hasn't locked anyone up for years without any explanation, the way Bush did.
01:38 PM on 02/23/2009
Gitmo detainees should get access to civilian courts, but not Afghan detainees. Looks like we had better decide if we are at war or not, or if this whole terrorism situation is hyper-law enforcement or not. At the moment, it does not appear that either the Executive or the Legislative have a clue, nor does the Judicial. Meanwhile Joe American, your liberty is being assaulted on numerous fronts.

http://allanerickson.wordpress.com/2009/02/23/paranoid-or-perceptive/
01:33 PM on 02/23/2009
This whole "in your neighborhood" argument is stupid! We have proven murderers and child molesters roaming our streets and neighborhoods all of the time. I would at least like these people to have a chance to be convicted of something. Giving someone their day in court is not synonymous to setting them free. And if our government and military have done things that would set potential terrorists free b/c they tortured them or something, well, I think the same should go for them that goes for murderers in our country. You don't read them their Miranda rights, don't allow them due process w/out intimidation and whatnot, foul up the case in anyway and you've set a guilty person free, it's the law. If they really want to protect us from terrorists, they will follow the Geneva conventions so that when a guilty bad guy has his day in court he won't get off scott free b/c some d**k in a uniform beat him like Rodney King.
01:19 PM on 02/23/2009
Wow, Obama has kept the Bush Administrations policy of bombing civilians.

Wow, Obama has kept the Bush Administrations practice of keeping emails private.

Wow, Obama has kept the Bush Administrations policy of Rendition.

Wow, Obama has created warmongers out of anti-war left wing hippies.

Wow, Obama keeps Bush Administrations policy of keeping detainees away from court rooms.

Change we can believe in folks!! GO OBAMA!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mitsie
11:53 AM on 02/23/2009
WE ARE IN A WAR IN AFGANASTAN, WE DON'T NEED THESE ALLEGED TERRORISTS IN THE US. DOES ANYONE HERE WANT THEM LIVING IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD? I THINK NOT!!!!!!!

This war is out of control right now. If we have a judge throw out a case, that terrorist will go free. I am all for constitutional law that protects people, I am all for justice in our courts, but I never heard of bringing alleged terrorists suspects here. The Afganastan govt. needs to be involved as well as the world justice system.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mjc
Avoid printing any..
11:53 AM on 02/23/2009
It seems Obama is going to lose support from a lot of people who believed in him early on, supported him with whatever they could, and probably wrote most of the blog responses on this site during the primary and the national election campaign: liberals, young people, well-educated, people of color, various left-leaning organizations like MoveOn, TrueMajority, and Truthout. Perhaps a lesson is here to be learned. Critics of the stance, blanking the top of the ballot, said that Obama would probably go to the center position for his political ideology once he had the nomination. I never really believed that the center was his destination, unfortunately. He has charm, charisma, intelligence, and good political instincts in some cases. But those attributes seem to have turned right to implement a government that in many ways is an extension of George Bush's. If he continues to cancel his promises and ignores the human rights of detainees, his term in office could be one year only, sadly enough.
12:31 PM on 02/23/2009
If he continues to go this path Obama would definitely be a one term president. He will leave office with numbers as low as Bush's if not even lower. There was a statement American people made by appointing him to the highest office in the land, which unlike Bush I thought he was getting. Day by day there are more indications that he most certainly is about to let the American people down. Bring back our troops, no ifs, no buts, no but wait let me explain it to you, no reasoning, no explanation, no justification, no terrorist threats, PLEASE ..... Which part is he not getting. No more shedding American blood. No more crying American moms, sisters, daughters, dads, brothers. No more American flag covered coffins arriving from battle zones. PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE. Feel the pain of families, who have lost loved ones for once.
11:42 AM on 02/23/2009
There is clearly a difference between Gitmo and the prisons in the war zones. When has there ever been a war without war prisons and prisoners of war? What is the alternative, just killing everybody? Guantanamo Bay was set up where it is so that it would be outside the war zone and therefore could be argued to be outside the scope of the Geneva Convention.

If they are conducting the same outrages against the rules of the Geneva Convention in those prisons inside the war zone, then that is another matter, but those prisons in and of themselves are not illegal. Guantanamo Bay is.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mjc
Avoid printing any..
12:00 PM on 02/23/2009
Torture is illegal....at least we thought....for prisoners no matter where the prison is. Denying habeas corpus is the tyrants' way of treating humans as less than existing. And it is outside of the Geneva Convention. But proving it requires legalities such as definition of the crime, review of what the person accused of being a combatant did. That is why habeas corpus is so important.
12:30 PM on 02/23/2009
Um, POWs don't get habeas corpus because they aren't being held on criminal charges...get it? The didn't get killed in battle, they got captured, they didn't not get executed.

These aren't criminals, they are combatants who don't wear uniforms. They are POWs.

Its about the Geneva Convention, not Habeas Corpus. Obama is doing the right thing.
10:31 AM on 02/23/2009
Obama bring back our soldiers; without precondition and no buts. Our country is disappearing in thin air and you are sending 17 000 more troops to Afganistan. I voted for you because you said you'll bring our troops home. Be half the man JFK is and bring our troops home; no ifs no buts no precondition, no reasoning, no excuses, no trying to explain whys, no more we use Afganistan as testing area for our new weapons, PLEASE.
You know as well as I do there is no winning in Afganistan. Stop this insanity. Let Afganistan be. It is not worth our soldier's blood. You can't spread democracy if people do not want it, you CAN NOT. Even if you ever get the illusion of you have won; the minute you leave everything will change in Afganistan.
01:53 PM on 02/23/2009
Are you talking about the same JFK that started Viet Nam ?
02:49 PM on 02/23/2009
JFK did not "start" Viet Nam, Truman started the ball rolling. Actually, JFK had been debating ending the US involvement in Viet Nam. Had he not been assassinated, it is considered highly probable that we would have gotten out of there.

After his assassination, Johnson dramatically increased the numbers of Americans there and expanded the role from "military advisers" (not the principle force conducting the war,) to an actively military action. Officially, Viet Nam was not a war.

Try telling that to all who came home in body bags or injured or didn't come home at all. The latter including many POWs.
08:10 AM on 02/23/2009
Such courage this attorney general has. It is just astonishing.
06:47 AM on 02/23/2009
Change. I just love me some Change, I tell ya.

Seriously, why didn't he just hire Bush as the War Czar?
12:26 AM on 02/23/2009
And Americans continue to wonder 'OH WHY DO THEY HATE US?!' Are the American leaders really that blind that they can't understand a simple cause-effect scenario? How's this one for a start: You invade their country, bomb their villages, kidnap their men, kill their children, and leave them to starve they will bomb you back, using whatever rationale they can find, including religion. It's really a simple thing.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mitsie
11:57 AM on 02/23/2009
No it isn't simple as we would like. These prisoners are alleged terrorists who will go back and regroup to kill our soldiers or plan another 9/11. In case of national security we have to do what we have to do to protect us.

BTW why does everyone want things yesterday? GIve our new President some time and let him work on this issue.
12:31 PM on 02/23/2009
exactly