To bolster his argument that the Guantánamo detainees should be denied the right to prove their innocence in federal courts, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in his dissent in Boumediene v. Bush: "At least 30 of those prisoners hitherto released from Guantánamo have returned to the battlefield." It turns out that statement is false.
According to a new report by Seton Hall Law Center for Policy and Research, "The statistic was endorsed by a Senate Minority Report issued June 26, 2007, which cites a media outlet, CNN. CNN, in turn, named the DoD as its source. The '30' number, however, was corrected in a DoD press release issued in July 2007, and a DoD document submitted to the House Foreign Relations Committee on May 20, 2008 abandons the claim entirely."
The largest possible number of detainees who could have "returned to the fight" is 12; however, the Department of Defense has no system for tracking the whereabouts of released detainees. The only one who has undisputedly taken up arms against the United States or its allies, "ISN 220," was released by political officers of the DoD against the recommendations of military officers.
Scalia bolstered his hysterical claim that the Boumediene decision "will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed" with stale information that was proven to be false one year ago. Professor Mark Denbeaux, director of the Seton Hall Center, said Scalia "was relying uncritically on information that originated with a party in the case before him."
The Supreme Court decided in a 5-4 decision that the Guantánamo detainees were entitled to file petitions for writ of habeas corpus to challenge their detention. More than 200 men who have been held for up to six years and have never been charged with a crime, will now have their day in court. Many were snatched from their homes, picked up off the street or in airports, or sold to the U.S. military by warlords for bounty.
Scalia, who sits on the highest court in the land, has acted as a loyal foot soldier for the executive branch of government.
Scalia may have violated the USA Patriot Act. Should scalia be investigated under the USA Patriot Act?
The USA Patriot Act provides extremely powerful discovery and investigatory tools, scalia would wither. A legal remedy for the felony act of providing false information on terrorism is felony prosecution with the powerful USA Patriot Act felony provisions.
Loose lips sink ships, scalia made a foolish statement born of hubris he knew to be false. Scalia is a felony violator of the USA Patriot Act.
scalia may be guilty of a class A, B, or C USA Patriot Act felony violation.
scalia's might excuse this as, 'made a mistake', or, 'just didn't know' or some other weak excuse. We must hold the highest officials of the court to the highest standards and not only in matters of the decisions they make, but also and most importantly in the bearing of the law as it applys to the individuals that make up the court and our government as they apply those very laws to all of us.
If scalia knew, and lied about terrorism then he is un-American and is guilt of felony violation of the USA Patriot Act. False information on terrorism is un-American.
It is what Republicans do.
Forget that he is not supposed to be a Republican Supreme Court Justice.
He is supposed to be an American justice.
But he is not.
The "appearance of impropriety" should be avoided. Others statements by the Justice call his impartiality into question.
Many inmates go back to crime, however, there was a reason to arrest them in the first place. Many of the Gitmo inmates were turned in for a bounty or arrested as a result of others who were tortured. There are not even records of the reasons four and five years later, so the temptation is very great to obtain confessions by torture and to justify this inhumane and possibly illegal behavior. A delay in determining whether there is even a reason to detain a suspect is usually were prejudicial, especially where there are no lawyers and torture is being used.
The dissent contains ad hoc reasoning. You are guilty because we said so. We arrested you because you're guilty.
That is frightening reasoning coming from any officer of the court.
But from a Supreme Court Justice?
Unforgivable.
He has violated his oath of office. He should be impeached.
Some number of those released may have gone from prisoner to jihadi. But did they RETURN to that activity or TURN to it?
The RICO Act, the USA Patriot Act, racketeering and misprision of felony, I mean AMERICA ! What kind of filth is in your highest offices I mean sometimes I just can't believe this is happening in my sweet nation that I wish so dearly to love and respect.