Did Scalia Prejudge Guantanamo Case?
Newsweek surfaces unpublicized comments by the Supreme Court justice in which he scoffs at the idea of extending full legal rights to Guantanamo detainees. Problem is: He has yet to judge that case.
Newsweek surfaces unpublicized comments by the Supreme Court justice in which he scoffs at the idea of extending full legal rights to Guantanamo detainees. Problem is: He has yet to judge that case.
Rock Solid JournalismNewsweek:
April 3, 2006 issue – The Supreme Court this week will hear arguments in a big case: whether to allow the Bush administration to try Guantnamo detainees in special military tribunals with limited rights for the accused. But Justice Antonin Scalia has already spoken his mind about some of the issues in the matter. During an unpublicized March 8 talk at the University of Freiburg in Switzerland, Scalia dismissed the idea that the detainees have rights under the U.S. Constitution or international conventions, adding he was “astounded” at the “hypocritical” reaction in Europe to Gitmo. “War is war, and it has never been the case that when you captured a combatant you have to give them a jury trial in your civil courts,” he says on a tape of the talk reviewed by NEWSWEEK. “Give me a break.”
In 2026, amid chaos and the nonstop flurry of headlines, Truthdig remains independent, fact-based and focused on exposing what power tries to hide.
Support Independent Journalism.
Courts & Law
If you want to deepen your understanding of the differences between “originalism” and “living constitutionalism” as competing theories of constitutional law and interpretation, there’s no better place to begin than with the 2006 debate between the late conservative Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and the recently retired liberal Justice Stephen Breyer.
A new Second Amendment appeal could radically expand the scope of District of Columbia v. Heller, handicapping Congress for years to come.
The implications of Justice Thomas’ tenure on the nation’s top court extend far beyond his own career and legacy.
And with Neil Gorsuch and now Brett Kavanaugh in tow, the president is well on his way achieving his objective.
The confirmation of President Trump's nominee would mark the culmination of a right-wing legal counterrevolution that has been decades in the making.
The president has chosen a candidate who poses a great threat to progressive values and causes—and one who might shield him from Mueller.
You need to be a supporter to comment.
There are currently no responses to this article.
Be the first to respond.