<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Cato @ Liberty &#187; military prison</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/tag/military-prison/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cato-at-liberty.org</link>
	<description>Cato Institute Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 21:19:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
<cloud domain='www.cato-at-liberty.org' port='80' path='/?rsscloud=notify' registerProcedure='' protocol='http-post' />
		<item>
		<title>Supreme Court Will Not Hear al-Marri Appeal</title>
		<link>http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/supreme-court-will-not-hear-al-marri-appeal/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/supreme-court-will-not-hear-al-marri-appeal/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2009 19:02:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Rittgers</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law and Civil Liberties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Al Qaeda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[al-Marri]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Counterterrorism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[detainee]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[enemy combatant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[military prison]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/?p=6216</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>By David Rittgers</p>The Supreme Court previously granted certiorari to the appeal of Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri, the only enemy combatant taken into custody domestically and detained in a military brig. The Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that he could continue to be detained as an alleged al Qaeda operative without trial. The Supreme Court [...]<p><a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/supreme-court-will-not-hear-al-marri-appeal/">Supreme Court Will Not Hear al-Marri Appeal</a> is a post from <a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org">Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog</a></p>
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By David Rittgers</p><p>The Supreme Court previously <a href="http://www.supremecourtus.gov/orders/courtorders/120508zr.pdf">granted certiorari</a> to the appeal of Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri, the only enemy combatant taken into custody domestically and detained in a military brig. The Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit <a href="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/067427A.P.pdf">held</a> that he could continue to be detained as an alleged al Qaeda operative without trial. The Supreme Court <a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/al-marri-overruled/">reversed</a> its decision to hear the case today.</p>
<p>The Obama administration <a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/02/26/trying-al-marri/">moved</a> him back into the civilian criminal justice system, and <a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/us-denies-manipulating-al-marri-case/">denied</a> that it was doing so to keep the lower domestic detainee precedent intact. It <a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/doj-al-marri-reply-3-4-09.pdf">argued</a> that denying review while vacating the Fourth Circuit&#8217;s decision would serve the ends of justice. Apparently, the Court agreed.</p>
<p>As I have <a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/01/09/the-measure-of-our-own-liberties/">said</a> <a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/01/29/al-marri-is-probably-a-terrorist-%E2%80%94-we-should-have-tried-him/">before</a>, domestic counterterrorism is a law enforcement task, not a military one. The <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/05/AR2009030503276.html"><em>Washington Post</em></a> and <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/06/opinion/06fri3.html?_r=1&#038;scp=2&#038;sq=al-marri&#038;st=cse"><em>New York Times</em></a> both wanted the Supreme Court to hear the case and rule that domestic detention is unconstitutional.</p>
<p>Obama&#8217;s actions seem to indicate either a lack of interest or a disagreement with the sweeping power claimed by President Bush, that presidents can simply whisk off any person in the U.S. — including citizens — to a military prison without a trial. But now that the Supreme Court has declined to rule on the executive&#8217;s claims in this case, we will not have the benefit of a Supreme Court precedent repudiating the executive&#8217;s overreach. Whether or not Obama tries to repeat what Bush did, another president will likely try to do it again. Not good.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/supreme-court-will-not-hear-al-marri-appeal/">Supreme Court Will Not Hear al-Marri Appeal</a> is a post from <a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org">Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/supreme-court-will-not-hear-al-marri-appeal/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic page generated in 0.108 seconds. -->
<!-- Cached page generated by WP-Super-Cache on 2012-02-10 20:37:52 -->
<!-- Compression = gzip -->
