Restoring habeas corpus

When the Military Commissions Act, which among other things suspended habeas corpus for suspected terrorists, went to the Senate floor in September, Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) noted, “Surely as we are standing here, if this bill is passed and habeas corpus is stricken, we’ll be back on this floor again” after the courts reject the legislation.

Fortunately, senators aren’t waiting for courts to intervene; they’re taking the law on before the MCA is struck down. In December, we saw the first inkling that the MCA might be revisited in 2007. Today Sens. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) and Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) unveiled the first step.

[The Restoring the Constitution Act of 2007 — A Bill to Provide for the Effective Prosecution of Terrorists and to Guarantee Due Process Rights], according to Dodd, would reintroduce habeas corpus protections to Guantanamo Bay detainees; create an independent court review to military commission rulings; and bar information obtained through “coercion” (read: torture); among other provisions.

Whether Dodd and Menendez’s legal fix will pass is unclear. It essentially reverses the Bush administration’s favored Military Commissions Act of last year, which stripped habeas rights from terrorism detainees — and passed the Senate with 65 votes.

The bill would almost certainly face a veto from the White House. But with civil liberties lawyers gearing up for a litany of legal challenges to the MCA’s constitutionality, Dodd and Menendez might have an opening.

We can certainly hope so.

It’s worth adding here that Dodd voted against the MCA last fall, but Menendez, perhaps worried about winning a full term, voted for it. Now, he’s trying to help correct his mistake. Good for him.

The full text of the legislation is online (.pdf), but for those who prefer to review a more talking-points style version of the bill, here’s a rundown of what the bill does:

1. It restores the writ of habeas corpus for individuals held in US custody.

2. It narrows the definition of unlawful enemy combatant to individuals who directly participate in a zone of active combat against the United States, and to individuals who participated in attacks against the United States on September 11, 2001.

3. It requires that the United States live up to its Geneva Convention obligations by deleting a prohibition in law that bars detainees from invoking Geneva Conventions as a source of rights at trial.

4. It permits accused to retain qualified civilian attorneys to represent them at trial, or to choose self representation.

5. It prevents the use of evidence in court gained through the unreliable and immoral practices of torture and coercion.

6. It charges the military judge with the responsibility for ensuring that the jury is apprised of sources, methods and activities associated with acquiring out of court statements that if known to the jury would impact on the credibility of the statement, or alternatively that such statements are not introduced at trial.

7. It empowers military judges to exclude hearsay evidence they deem to be unreliable.

8. It authorizes the US Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces to review decisions by the military commissions.

9. It limits the authority of the President to interpret the meaning and application of the Geneva Conventions and makes that authority subject to congressional and judicial oversight.

10. It clarifies the definition of war crimes in statute to include certain violations of the Geneva Conventions.

11. Finally, it provides for expedited judicial review of the Military Commissions Act of 2006 to determine the constitutionally of its provisions.

Dodd also has a good video clip, explaining why he thinks the measure is important.

I have to say, it’s encouraging to see Dem senators following up on this. It might have been easy (and rather cynical) to focus on new policy goals, and let the MCA stand, but it was a mistake worth correcting. I’m glad some senators realize that.

All Daily Show “Dodd jokes” aside, I’m beginning to like this presidential candidate’s political positions…

  • Better late than never I guess. I’m sure Bush will veto whatever they try to put through., but at least they are trying to undo some of the most terrible stuff. You can’t really call them a do-nothing congress so far, even if they are not getting anything signed into law. At least it’s a start.

  • 10. It clarifies the definition of war crimes in statute to include certain violations of the Geneva Conventions.

    Sounds good to me. Can we look at how many war crimes Rumsfailed ordered committed?

  • How does any American with a conscious not support this? What’s the Bush-ite comeback? If this passes then the terrorists win?

  • A note on framing:

    I think it is misleading to say that the MCA “suspended” habeas corpus only for “suspected terrorists.” Rather, the MCA took away the habeas corpus protections from all accused of terrorist activities.

    In other words, the MCA does not make habeas protection dependent on what the President or his underlings actually suspect. Rather, it makes protection dependent on what the President claims.

  • I want to see how Herr Bush manages to promote a “legacy” that includes vetoing Habeus. The Congress gave him a “bye” the first go-around with the MCA. Vetoing a Congressional rejection of torture gives him sole ownership of any war-crimes brought before the Hague—and any member of Congress that votes with him on this issue, given the opportunity to reverse their earlier decision, will share in that terrible responsibility. Choosing to enable a war-crime makes one an accomplice to that war-crime….

  • I don’t understand why the current so-called law isn’t being thrown out on Constitutional grounds. Article One, Section 9, clearly states “The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.” Is there a rebellion or invasion taking place here?

  • The Restoring the Constitution Act of 2007

    A very good title and an excellent set of objectives. And it might even pass, because who’ll want to go on record that they’re wiping their butts with the Constitution they swore to upheld? Bush will, doubtless, add a signing statement negating it but aren’t other committees looking into reining in the Chimperor? So, maybe, maybe, we’ll be able to wipe that particular stain off our national honour.

    re invasion and rebellion (Ed Stephan, @7):
    Well, we invaded and they’re rebelling… And the safety of the entire maladministration depends on having every opponent branded as enemy combatant, with no right to habeas.

  • I wholeheartedly support this action on the substance. The MCA was perhaps the most deeply anti-American legislation of my lifetime, in terms of transgressing the spirit of our Constitution.

    But they’d better get the politics right. Remember, the Republicans’ great strength is that they offer simple policies for the simple-minded. They’ve won most recent elections in part because they can state their positions quickly and easily; we get mired in complexity, and the couch potato chunk of the electorate turns off.

    I don’t know specifically what the best approach would be–touting the Constitution, restoring our good name in the world, not having the taxpayers foot the bill for indefinite detentions–but there has to be something sharp and pithy, or else Democrats will be left twisting in the wind under another Rovian attack.

  • The current law will eventually be thrown out on Constitutional grounds but it has to wind its way through the courts first. there is litigation on this however. there is also litigation regarding the aspects of the Patriot Act that allow warrantless searches of one’s house and warrantless electronic surveillance. Brandon Mayfield, the attorney falsely accused of the Madrid bombings is challenging the Act in court.

    check out:

    http://projecthamad.org/blog

    for a post by Brandon Mayfield about habeas corpus, FISA and the Military Commissions Act, and other posts on these topics as well. in addition to going to Senator Dodd’s website and becoming a citizen endorser of the restoration of habeas act, you can put your name behind habeas restoration at:

    http://projecthamad.org/take-action/

  • This is how terrorism is defeated. By proving this nation has the stomach, the will, the balls, the whatever it takes to still be a nation of higher ideals than those of terrorists. If we can still be the land of the brave and the home of the free after someone attacks us, we win, they lose.

  • We can pursue terrorists, protect our homeland AND maintain our ideals. Maintaining our Constitutional principles is neither a liberal nor a conservative position; it is an American position.

    For six years, I have wondered what happened to our nation. Where were our ideals? Had our fear of terrorism really led us to abandon everything that made our nation grand? Did Americans really support this horrible, incompetent Administration?

    I am convinced November, 2006 was the turning point. Elections really do matter. A majority of our citizens looked in the mirror and said “enough”.

    I do not know if this legislation will pass this year. But I know it will pass soon. And then finally, I will again say, as I’ve said my entire life,”I’m very proud to be an American.”

  • I have sent another letter to my senator-Warner (whom I got into a flurry of letters back and forth this winter regarding habeaus corpus and the American held prisoners). I think that the minimun that we should be giving those who are supposed to be tried for these offenses is basic legal rights such as our Constitution gives all…and it doesn’t say that these rights are only for native born Americans. We have to show that the United States Constitution stands for something, that democracy is something to be obtained and cherished. And not the model that is being shown by this President and vice President.

  • Menendez, perhaps worried about winning a full term, voted for it.

    Come on, CB, don’t be coy. You know as well as anyone that the most egregious surrender of power bills imaginable are rolled out by this administration right before an election, with the threat of “terrorist sympathizer” labeling the penalty for denying the pResident yet more unwarranted power. This was their 2006 version, just as their 2002 version was surrendering war powers to the chimp. And of course it worked this time too, but fortunately we kicked enough of the scumbags out to be able to go back and attempt a fix. Jeebus H. Christ, Congress has been played like a Rovian harp for six years now. I hope to hell they get back at the bastards by a double impeachment and war crimes trials at the Hague. Time to sign on to the International Criminal Court.

  • Comments are closed.