A Stitch in Haste

Here's a quick summary of the Military Commissions Bill, a/k/a the Alien and Sedition Act of 2006:

Included in the bill ... are unique rules that bar terrorism suspects from challenging their detention or treatment through traditional habeas corpus petitions. They allow prosecutors, under certain conditions, to use evidence collected through hearsay or coercion to seek criminal convictions.

The bill rejects the right to a speedy trial and limits the traditional right to self-representation by requiring that defendants accept military defense attorneys. Panels of military officers need not reach unanimous agreement to win convictions, except in death penalty cases, and appeals must go through a second military panel before reaching a federal civilian court.

By writing into law for the first time the definition of an "unlawful enemy combatant," the bill empowers the executive branch to detain indefinitely anyone it determines to have "purposefully and materially" supported anti-U.S. hostilities. Only foreign nationals among those detainees can be tried by the military commissions, as they are known, and sentenced to decades in jail or put to death.
...
Under the new procedures, trials are supposed to be open, but can be closed to protect the security of individuals or information expected to harm national security.

A few hasty stitches:

--"Detain indefinitely anyone" is generally thought to include American citizens on American soil. And although only foreign nationals can be tried by the military commissions, keep in mind that there need never be a trial at all. It is conceivable, if unlikely, that American citizens on American soil could start "disappearing" they way they did in the Soviet Union (a/k/a "The Evil Empire").

--If you are a textualist (like me), then the bill's revocation of habeas corpus is patently unconstitutional:

The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

No amount of sophistry can change the fact that we do not currently face "rebellion or invasion." Even 9/11 was not an "invasion." The Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are not "invasions." This is not a difficult concept.

--Do the Members of Congree even understand what they have done...

Jay Rockefeller ... complained that the White House has concealed all information about the program and that the Intelligence Committee members (including him) know nothing about this interrogation program. ... He then proceeded to vote for the underlying bill anyway.

...and do they care?

During the debate on his amendment, Arlen Specter said that the bill sends us back 900 years because it denies habeas corpus protections. Then he voted for it.

Now it's up to the "activist judges" to restore sanity.

--In case you think you can still reason with the apologists of this Administration and this bill, then try to imagine reasoning with someone who gives this description of Guantanamo Bay:

They were being treated very lavishly, as you know, to Ramadan, and we [ate] the meal that ... when I was down there, that the detainees eat, and very proudly, we were told, as they served up this fantastic meal[.]
...
These guys have fantastic facilities, certainly better facilities than anyone in any previous war has ever enjoyed.

That's Bush-worshipper Mark Steyn, who also notes, in passing, that some of the detainees have been there for four and a half years. "Fantastic" indeed.

Stay tuned...