Not to the administration, or to Congress.

..."the court has a long history of deferring to wartime presidents in their role as commander-in-chief."

Remember that Cheney said that this 'war' will not end in our lifetimes. A permanent state of war, in terms of presidents-as-commander-in-chief, is a recipe for dictatorship.

" The idea that enemies captured fighting American soldiers on the battlefield have due process rights is frankly idiotic; one suspects the ruling is much more narrow than described by CNN."

The idea that these people were all, or even in the majority, captured 'fighting American soldiers on the battlefield' is known to be false; the US paid Pakistani bounty hunters to produce 'Taliban' and 'Al Qaida'.

Given the Hamdan decision today (which I haven’t had time to really digest, and hence the lack of commentary from me at this moment in time) and the discussion of the Geneva Conventions within the majority opinion, I expect that there will be so...

The Dems have decided to replace it with be kind to a terrorist week. Wannabe House Majority Leader Pelosi ... yeah, sure.Today's Supreme Court decision reaffirms the American ideal that all are entitled to the basic guarantees of our justice...

Although I have not actually read the entire Constitution, I believe that in the Article that gives the President the power to designate enemy combatants there is nothing that explicitly protects members of the Supreme Court from being declared enemy c...

Congress doesn't have the necessary anatomy to do anything that does not put a buck into their pockets.

Our glorious Representatives and Senators are nothing more that a lost cause that lines their pockets at the expense of every American while singing their own praises and making speeches telling everyone how they are the "Great Americans"

Congressman and Senators are also the "Bastards of America"

It's done and over with. Hamdan will get his day in Federal District Court. If the case is strong, he'll get the appropriate justice. Just like if it had been a military court. I think 12 jurors will make the right decision...

In a 5-3 decision, the US Supreme Court has ruled that the Bush administration does not have the authority to try terrorism suspects by military tribunal. The New York Times reports: The Supreme Court today delivered a sweeping rebuke to...

The Supreme Court issued their Hamdan ruling and it's a loss for the President and his military tribunals. The most......

Interestingly, this permits a backdoor evasion of the ruling. Congress could, this afternoon if it wishes (assuming the Members could be rounded up) pass a statute authorizing these specific military commissions and stating that the Courts have no jurisdiction over them.

Well, yes. I think Breyer says as much in his concurrence. Glenn Greenwald notes that Congress can overturn most, if not all of the decision, by merely passing a statute.

But isn't the decisive language in this portion as follows?

The Government acknowledges that only paragraphs (2)and (3) of subsection (e) are expressly made applicable to pending cases, see §1005(h)(2), 119 Stat. 2743â??2744, but argues that the omission of paragraph (1) from the scopeof that express statement is of no moment. This is so, we are told, because Congressâ?? failure to expressly reserve federal courtsâ?? jurisdiction over pending cases erects a presumption against jurisdiction, and that presumption isrebutted by neither the text nor the legislative history of the DTA.

In plain language, Congress could applied the DTA to petitions under para. (e)(1), but didn't. That's the ball game, given their express language about pending cases under (2) and (3).

Luckily, Bush said that he is not going to follow the opinion if it jeaprodizes the security of the American People. Thankfully we have a leader with enough resolution to make sure that the rule of law doesn't get in the way of securing freedom.