US Can Hold Gitmo Detainees Indefinitely, Judge Says

WASHINGTON — A federal judge says the United States can continue to hold some prisoners at Guantanamo Bay indefinitely without any charges.

U.S. District Judge John Bates' opinion issued Tuesday night limited the Obama administration's definition of who can be held. But he said Congress in the days after Sept. 11, 2001 gave the president the authority to hold anyone involved in planning, aiding or carrying out the terrorist attacks.

Bates' opinion comes amid increasing debate over whether President Barack Obama is going to release anyone from Guantanamo. Obama has promised to close the prison by January, but Senate Democrats say they will block the move until he comes up with a plan for the detainees.

Bates' opinion came in the case of several Guantanamo prisoners who are challenging their detention. ACLU attorney Jonathan Hafetz said the opinion "flouts the Constitution's prohibition against indefinite detention without charge."

"The decision wrongly concludes that terrorism suspects at Guantanamo may continue to languish in military detention rather than being prosecuted in our civilian courts," Hafetz said. "Like the president's recent decision to revive military commissions, this ruling perpetuates rather than ends the failed experiment in lawlessness that is Guantanamo."

Earlier this year, Bates ordered the Obama administration to give its definition of whom the United States can continue to hold at Guantanamo. The administration responded with a definition that was largely similar to the Bush administration's, drawing criticism from human rights advocates.

In his opinion, Bates said he agreed with the Obama administration that "the president has the authority to detain persons that the president determines planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, and persons who harbored those responsible for those attacks.

"The president also has the authority to detain persons who are or were part of Taliban or al-Qaida forces or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed (i.e., directly participated in) a belligerent act in aid of such enemy armed forces," Bates wrote.

But he said the Obama administration went beyond the law of war by including in its definition those who "supported" enemy forces.

"The court can find no authority in domestic law or the law of war, nor can the government point to any, to justify the concept of 'support' as a valid ground for detention," Bates wrote.

Last month, Bates ruled that prisoners at Bagram Airfield in Afghanistan can challenge their detention, for the first time extending rights given to Guantanamo Bay detainees elsewhere in the world.

Comments

[sweetlucy47]

,

[Carolab]

"...to hold anyone involved in planning, aiding or carrying out the terrorist attacks"

But that is exactly the point of letting them have a fair trial -- to find out whether they did.

Total Catch 22.

[OliverTwist]

Exactly.

It is really weird to hear Republicans and some others say that we need military commisions otherwise some of the "terrorists" detained at Gitmo might be found innocent (of being terrorists) and be released and be walking around in America (not likely since they will be detained while waiting for their deportation flight) being their "terrorist" (which they were found inncocent of being) selves.

These people seem to be brain dead. I think it's actually a combination of bigotry and dishonesty with just a touch of wet mop stupidity.

Some people clearly never heard that it ain't what we don't know that causes us the most trouble it's what we know that just ain't so.

[realpolitic]

It is just another exampe of an opinion by a conservative activist judge who disregards the constitution in favor of executive power!

[showmestategal]

Someone please get this idiot off the bench!
Happy to hear you have no problem being a detainee,
Which wars did you fight for your country or were you a draft dodger like cheney?
"You cannot Handle the Truth"
Therefore you are a republican because you are incapable of recognizing it!

You can't truly believe these detainee DESERVE THISl treatment afforded them at the hand of cheney /bush administration.-- they have homes they have families' the have countries of origin. Do you & do they mean anything TO YOU!
No one wants Guantanamo closed in its Entirety only allowing cheney/bush Administration detainees the right to due process of Law & Human Rights like any judge would know is the law.

We Thank God that in Retaliation they did not set up A GITMO that we could be trying to get our Son's & Daughter's out of in Iraq being kept for Years without proof OF what cheney said they were.
NOT ABOUT OUR SAFETY BALONEY IT IS JUST ANOTHER GAME OF PLAYING POLITICS STATUS QUO or stay the course!

MY Suggestion Federal Prison in Leavenworth Kansas since they are the detainees of the Republican Administration what better place THAN Kansas 2 Republican Senators sure would help move the Process Along

WE could all be the Moral Democracy showing the World Community & Our Allies that they could TRUST us again.

We thankfully To GOD are People with a Moral Compass.......

We need the base buildings at gitmo for our War

[w8aminute]

Doesn't Congress realize what they are really doing? They are telling the world - terrorists and non-terrorists alike - that America is just scared sh**less. Never before in history were we afraid of jailing anyone. Now we are afraid of Air Force One flying over NYC. We're afraid of everything. That's the message we are sending. We weren't afraid of going in and killing Iraqi's, but to have a couple hundred here in maximum security - ohhhh noooo! Can't manage that kind of horror under our own noses. I'm so ashamed. Where's the bravado that came out when congress renamed french fries to freedom fries? That's the message they are sending.

[stuporman]

just go shopping and don't worry about it...

[missouriwatcher]

This is just wrong! Our founding fathers must be spinning in their graves. One of the biggest reasons I was so adamantly opposed to the Bush admin is because of their blatant anti-Constitution rules/actions. Now, it appears that our new President has taken up the Bush mantle. This kind of thing makes me sick.

[UncleJimbo]

Holding people forever! Or until they die! Without a Trial! That's called a Concentration Camp!

[research]

he was appointed by Bush.

What do you expect.

[reason2008]

The dems voted today against allowing gitmo detainees in the US prison system. Hilarious.

They want to shut down gitmo, but have no plan to make this happen.

And you complain about Bush?

What you are seeing lately with the Obama administration is that a lot of the Bush policies were right for the country. If this is not the case, then why isn't the dem controlled congress and president changing it? Because they can't! They know he was right.

[research]

Yes,I complain about BushCo.

To whatever degree the DINO DLC gutless dems go along with the policies,

It pales compared to the audacity of fascism and corporatism under BushCo.

Keep perspective.

[Chip W]

Not that Bush policies were right for the country, but that the mess is harder to straighten out than anticipated.

[research]

I hear Iran is holding Americans in prison indefinitely, accusing them of being spies.

Got a problem with that?

[Roguewolf]

Two administration officials who spoke on condition of anonymity said the report was being held up by Defense Department employees fearful of upsetting the White House, at a time when even Congressional Democrats have begun to show misgivings over Mr. Obama’s plan to close Guantánamo…
The report was made available by an administration official sympathetic to its findings who said the delay was creating unnecessary “conspiracy theories” about the holdup…
“If we hold it, then everybody claims it’s political and you’re protecting the Obama administration,” said a [DOD] official, who asked for anonymity because of the sensitivity of the situation. “And if we let it go, then everybody says you’re undermining Obama.”…
Among the 74 former prisoners that the report says are again engaged in terrorism, 29 have been identified by name by the Pentagon, including 16 named for the first time in the report. The Pentagon has said that the remaining 45 could not be named because of national security and intelligence-gathering concerns…
The Pentagon has so far provided no way of authenticating its 45 unnamed recidivists, and only a few of the 29 people who are identified by name can be independently verified as having engaged in terrorism since their release. Many of the 29 are simply described as associating with terrorists or training with terrorists, with almost no other details provided

[phiman]

SO we invaded Iraq with "SHOCK and AWE" killing hundreds of thousands of civilians (and 4000+ Americans) because ... Hmmm...they attacked us? They had WMDs? ... Why? We've never been given a valid reason.
Shouldn't it be OK for the Iraqis to have a Gitmo style prison to hold Americans (indefinitely, without habeas corpus) that they suspect of wanting to do them harm?

[PerfectSense]

Ask John Kerry, Hillary Clinton the current SOS and Joe Biden the current VP- they all voted to invade Iraq.

[FactsOnlyPodium]

Ask all the Dems that voted for the Iraq invasion, or ask the UN that numerous resolutions broken and allowing for war.

I'd be very curious about American prisoners and how they're being treated. Why do you think we don't hear of American prisoners?

[Veri]

Further desensitization to your rights. When will the government be able to hold you indefinitely, without trial and without charges? This is the slippery slope we find ourselves going down now. There is no rabbit hole. Only a long slope that ends at the bottom of the abyss after decades of planning and mismanagement.

Is our future destined to be a tyranny? Probably. Today, we have hope to change the destiny of the nation from one of tyranny to one of auto-self determination. Through out history, mankind has had to face those who would control the destiny of the many. We are no different today. We only think we are.

Progress has been made in enlightenment. And we have seen over our life times, our parents and grandparents lifetimes, hundreds of millions of lives lost and wasted. Withered on the vine. All because of the actions of a few reinforced by the inaction of the many.

Probably at no greater than in the last one hundred years has history witnessed such tyranny and destruction. We seek safety from the unknowns in life.

What does hold true is, "Those that would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither."

[zaz33]

Veri - Well said

[Veri]

Thank you.

[PerfectSense]

Probably at no greater than in the last one hundred years has history witnessed such tyranny and destruction.
=======================

Don't know much about history do you?

[PensacolaTiger]

More than you appear to.

[WeMustSpeakOut]

Apparently the time is now!
This is the case of a 16 year old boy who was seized from his home and family under the Patriot Act.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/5/6/728304/-(Urgent)-Patriot-Act-Strips-North-Carolina-Boy-of-Rights
http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/5049867/

"The family has been told they have no rights to see their child and, under the USA PATRIOT ACT, the child has no rights to even defend himself. They claim the Constitution does not apply to this 16 year old, natural born, American citizen."

Nice tyranny we have here.

[StillAmused]

Coulda fooled me... the TV machine said all nineteen d i e d in those planes, and Junior gave Os ama an official pass in Afghanistan. Seems all the 'planners' and 'doers' are already accounted for.

... unless we're working our way down a list of their relatives and friends.

[drbillybob]

Now that Obama has ended all coercive interrogations ... can someone please remind me why we should close Gitmo?

Because of a stupid campaign promise?

[HooverBush]

Maybe you should read this again & tell me what's wrong with it?

I've been voting Democratic nearly all of my life.
Why ????
Because the choice I always have is to vote for a Total Idiot Repiglican, a Crooked Repiglican, a Lying Repiglican, or a Democrat with no backbone, or balls. It's a tough choice, but I still have to vote for the lesser of two evils.
The Dems didn't have the balls to stop the war in Iraq, but the Repigs put us there.
The Dems didn't have the backbone to impeach the worst President & Vice Punk in the history of the USA, but the Repigs supported them for 8 years.
The Dems don't have the guts to hire a special prosecutor to put Bush & Cheney in prison where they belong, but the Repigs cheered Bush & Cheney through their full 8 years.
Repigs cry, "Not in my backyard" as to the bad guys from Gitmo, as if we don't have worse criminals in our Max Secures now, and the gutless Dems are afraid to laugh in their faces.
It's really getting sickening, but I'll have to keep voting for the spineless party, because they are a step up from the morons who oppose them.
LOL----Now they want to name the Dems, "The Democrat Socialist Party". What a bunch of Kindergarten Morons, brings back shades of "Freedom Fries".
I would say "Socialism" would be redistributing the wealth to the rich, like Reagan started and Bush accelerated