Executive powers: the impending decision
The Supreme Court of the United States announced today that it would take on a case regarding the Bush administration's use of military tribunals to try foreign terror suspects, primarily in Guantanamo Bay. This is excellent news, because it'll raise a critical issue to one of the highest-levels of debate in the country. The question of the powers of the executive in wartime is one that has become particularly relevant post 9/11 - there have been calls across the board that the rights of individual citizens are being trampled in the name of collective security and the war on terror. As a matter of fact, Canadian intellectual Michael Ignatieff has written a great book on the question, which I'd recommend reading. But from the Patriot Act to the treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo to the question of the administration's right to use torture, it's come up fairly often.
I don't have nearly enough legal savvy to be able to predict how the Supreme Court will rule, but I think it's a good thing that they've taken on the case and will engage in an intellectual debate on the matter. It'd be great if they came out strongly of the position that the executive's powers are not unlimited, even in wartime - it seems to me to be clear enough that limitless powers are no good. The powers of the executive should certainly be strengthened in times of danger, but there are some lines that we as a society should refuse to cross regardless of the circumstances. Now we wait for the Supreme Court to weigh in - should be interesting.
