Holy Crike!

SCOTUS tells him no! My my this is not working out the way Shrub intended at all. heh heh And his ace in the hole, John Boy, didn't participate because he heard the case on the appeals court last year - where he voted against the administration - so this was was very, very very sharp rebuke - essentially 6-3(counting Roberts).

I'll post excerpts of the opinion as they are released - I bet John Paul Stevens or Ginsburg wrote it. And I'd wager a $1 that Thomas, Scalia, and Alito sided with the government.

This is huge - if the admin defies the Supreme Court and keeps Guantanamo prisoners in cognito and refuses to implement habeus corpus, which I think is essentially what the justices will nail them on, that and a breach of seperation of powers - that's coup d'etat - at least the beginning of one. We'll see how much Shrub respects the Constitution won't we. If he defies them - man, there will be some pissed off conservatives - and I think that Roberts is actually extremely able as a jurist and will have no problem coming down like a hammer on the admin is it comes to that.

oooh - I love Constitutional law! I wonder what Paula thinks.

UPDATE I was right - Stevens wrote the majority and the three stooges dissented.

Stevens: "The military commission at issue is not expressly authorized by any congressional act . . . [the tribunals] must be understood to incorporate at least the barest of those trial protections that have been recognized by customary international law. . . . In undertaking to try Hamdan and subject him to criminal punishment, the executive (Bush) is bound to comply with the rule of law that prevails in this jurisdiction."

Bush's response: "To the extent there is latitude to work with the Congress to determine whether or not the military tribunals will be an avenue in which to give people their day in court, we will do so."