From: "Gary Britt" 

Yes.

Gary

"Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
news:43b3f554$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> Will it still be old news if the Supremes uphold the Fourth's ruling?
>
>
> "Gary Britt"  wrote in message
> news:43b3f389$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> > Old News Rich.  Yesterday the Administration appealed this ruling to the
> > Supreme Court.
> >
> > Gary
> >
> > "Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
> > news:43b3ea26{at}w3.nls.net...
> >> Looks like even judges that were favorable to Bush  'powers' are
starting
> > to
> >> get concerned
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/28/AR2005122801463
.html
> >> In its ruling last week, the 4th Circuit questioned the government's
> >> changing rationale for Padilla's detention since the September
decision,
> >> because the criminal charges do not mention a dirty bomb plot or any
> > attack
> >> inside the United States. The court said prosecutors had left the
> > appearance
> >> that they were trying to avoid Supreme Court review of Padilla's case
and
> >> suggested that Padilla might have been "held for these
years, even if
> >> justifiably, by mistake."
> >>
> >> http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/opinion/13491166.htm
> >>
> >> The extraordinary rebuke issued by the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of
> > Appeals
> >> to the Bush administration last week in the case of ''dirty bomber''
Jos‚
> >> Padilla may be a watershed in the debate over the presidential exercise
> >> of
> >> wartime powers. This has been a friendly venue for the administration
on
> > the
> >> issue of ''enemy combatants,'' but it refused to endorse the twisted
> >> legal
> >> maneuvering over the Padilla detention. The implicit message is that
the
> >> administration is running out of credible arguments to support an
> >> imperial
> >> view of the president's wartime powers.
> >>
> >> Apparently, ideological affinity goes only so far, because this time
even
> >> the justices of the Fourth Circuit balked.
> >>
> >> In an opinion written by Judge J. Michael Luttig, a particular favorite
> >> of
> >> conservatives, the court questioned the administration's motives and
even
> >> pondered the possibility that it was trying to evade a final ruling
> >> before
> >> the Supreme Court. This, Judge Luttig wrote in a unanimous opinion,
left
> > an
> >> impression that ``threatens the government's credibility before the
> >> courts.''
> >>
> >> It will be up to the Supreme Court to untangle the difficult issues
> > involved
> >> in the Padilla case. But it's important to note that neither that court
> > nor
> >> any lower court has challenged the doctrine that the president is
> >> invested
> >> with inherent wartime powers that exceed those spelled out in the
> >> Constitution. That's not the issue.
> >>
> >> Heed this message
> >>
> >> The ruling by the Fourth Circuit reflects another, more-important
> >> truth --
> >> that even those powers have some limits, and that the fundamental civil
> >> liberties of Americans cannot be brushed aside as an inconvenient
> >> encumbrance on presidential authority.
> >>
> >> The administration should heed this message. When your best friends
> > suggest
> >> that it's time to clean up your act, it's wise to pay attention.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5