Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    20 Aug '10 22:00
    The "swing vote" on the Supreme Court has weighed in and stated ""Article III courts are quite capable of trying these terrorist cases,"

    http://www.startribune.com/nation/101131014.html

    Interesting.
  2. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    20 Aug '10 22:44
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    The "swing vote" on the Supreme Court has weighed in and stated ""Article III courts are quite capable of trying these terrorist cases,"

    http://www.startribune.com/nation/101131014.html

    Interesting.
    Of course Article III courts are "capable" of trying terrorism cases; they've done it many many times. The question is whether Kennedy was referring to his own political opinions or what is mandated by the Constitution.

    The more interesting quote is:

    It was clear, he said, that an "attack on the rule of law has failed," referring to the use of military tribunals to try terrorist suspects, often before panels in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

    I'd like to hear the context of that quote to make sure he was really making a blanket statement on the use of military tribunals to try terrorist suspects or referring to something more narrow.

    During a question-and-answer session, Kennedy was asked how new Justice Elena Kagan would bring change to the high court.

    "It will be a different court," Kennedy said, without elaborating.


    This is probably incorrect. I doubt Kagan will be much different ideologically than Souter was.
  3. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    21 Aug '10 00:30
    Well that's a good counterexample to my WASP conspiracy theories...

    Oh, wait. His name is Kennedy. Never mind.