Supremes' terrorist rights decision

Fox News:

A divided Supreme Court ruled Thursday that foreign terrorism suspects held at Guantanamo Bay have rights under the Constitution to challenge their detention in U.S. civilian courts.

The justices, in a 5-4 ruling, handed the Bush administration its third setback at the high court since 2004 over its treatment of prisoners who are being held indefinitely and without charges at the U.S. naval base in Cuba.

Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the majority opinion and was joined by Justices John Paul Stevens, Stephen Breyer, David Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Dissenting were Chief Justice John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.

"Petitioners have the constitutional privilege of habeas corpus. They are not barred from seeking the writ or invoking the Suspension Clause's protections because they have been designated as enemy combatants or because of their presence at Guantanamo," Kennedy wrote.

"The Suspension Clause has full effect at Guantanamo. The government's argument that the Clause affords petitioners no rights because the United States does not claim sovereignty over the naval station is rejected," the opinion readers.

...

This is not a wise decision. It interferes with the President's war powers and it conveys rights that are not appropriate to people making war against us. It could result in terrorist being released to continue their war against us. It could also mean that we would be denied intelligence by the assertion of Fourth Amendment rights and the right to counsel by enemy combatants. It has to be one of the dumbest decisions in a long time. The constitution as a suicide pack is back in fashion.