Military limiting Guantanamo detainee access to lawyers

the Streif

¡¡¡¡sıʞunɹɹɹɹɹɹɹℲ
Donator
Aug 25, 2002
15,258
6,060
941
In a hot tub having a snow ball fight.
#1
August 7th, 2012
06:23 PM ET




[h=1]Military limiting Guantanamo detainee access to lawyers[/h] By Bill Mears, CNN Supreme Court Producer
The Obama administration has begun limiting the legal rights of terror suspects held at the Guantanamo Bay military prison in Cuba, telling a federal judge Tuesday the government alone should decide when the prisoners deserve regular access to their counsel.
In a 52-page filing, Justice Department lawyers said they have started restricting when Guantanamo prisoners can challenge their detention in a Washington-based federal court. If approved, any relaxing of the rules would be made on a case-by-case basis at the exclusive discretion of military officials, not by the courts.
At issue is whether a Supreme Court decision on detainee rights from 2008 gives federal courts the ultimate power to control so-called "habeas" petitions from foreign combatants in U.S. military custody. Volunteer private lawyers say they deserve regular access to their imprisoned clients, even if there is no active habeas challenge pending in court, or any pending charges.
Under the proposed changes, the Navy base commander at Guantanamo would have sole veto power over attorney access, as well as access to classified material, including information provided directly by the detainees from interrogations.
"The dispute thus before the Court, though important, is quite narrow," said the government in its legal filing. "The only question presented is whether detainees who have neither current nor impending habeas petitions are entitled to" challenge continued access to counsel. "The answer to that question is 'no.'"
The case is before Chief Judge Royce Lamberth. His court has been handling the many appeals filed by the prisoners. There are currently 168 detainees - all male - in the Guantanamo facility, most of whom do not have pending charges. Five Muslim men labeled "high-value detainees" are being prosecuted before a military commission for their alleged leadership roles in the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
In the so-called Boumediene ruling in 2008, the high court said "enemy combatants" held overseas in U.S. military custody have a right to a "meaningful review" of their detention in the civilian legal justice system. It would force the government to present evidence and justify keeping the prisoners indefinitely, without charges. But a federal appeals court in Washington has since refused to order the release of any detainee filing a habeas corpus writ, in some cases rejecting such orders from lower-court judges.
The administration has argued it does not seek to restrict lawyers who have an active legal appeal, but that the rights of detainees shrink once they have filed their first habeas challenge. The military says lawyers must now agree to the new conditions in order to have continued access to their clients and to any classified information the military would deem to release.
And lawyers would be prohibited from using any information they gather that might help the prisoners appearing before a Periodic Review Board. PRBs are newly designed panels of military officials to decide whether a Guantanamo inmate should continue to be held, and whether that person is a national security threat. Those boards were put in place by President Barack Obama by executive order, but have not been fully implemented.
"Executive Order 13,567 does not provide detainees who undergo PRB review with a judicially enforceable right to counsel, or any justification for asking the Court to impose a counsel-access regime on the PRB process other than the one developed, per the Order's direction, by the Secretary of Defense," said the government. "As a general matter, executive orders are viewed as management tools for implementing the President's policies, not as legally binding documents that may be enforced against the Executive Branch."
The government said the court's power to intervene was limited, and urged Judge Lamberth to deny the request guaranteeing attorney access. A court hearing is set for August 17 on the legal question.
http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/...ntanamo-detainee-access-to-lawyers/?hpt=hp_t1
 

weeniewawa

it's a man, baby!!!
May 21, 2005
12,076
1,267
593
Hell,California
#4
since when to detainees of combat get any chance to talk to their shyster?
 

Lord Zero

Viciously Silly
Aug 25, 2008
54,327
13,009
438
Atlanta, GA
#5
Obama is a piece of shit with no respect for the Constitution. What else is new?
 

fletcher

Darkness always says hello.
Donator
Feb 20, 2006
59,523
19,737
513
jersey
#9
I guess I win the argument since you can only insult instead of telling me how I'm wrong.
Where in the signing of the NDAA does it declare the United States a combat zone?
 

Josh_R

Registered User
Jan 29, 2005
5,847
458
578
Akron, Ohio
#11
since when to detainees of combat get any chance to talk to their shyster?
Since the Supreme Court said so:
At issue is whether a Supreme Court decision on detainee rights from 2008 gives federal courts the ultimate power to control so-called "habeas" petitions from foreign combatants in U.S. military custody.
 

whiskeyguy

PR representative for Drunk Whiskeyguy.
Donator
Jan 12, 2010
36,712
22,328
398
Northern California
#14
I wish there were a third party candidate with a great sense of humor who would just run against Obama 2012 with the promises Obama 2008 made, to the letter. It would be hilarious to watch him debate himself.
 

Lord Zero

Viciously Silly
Aug 25, 2008
54,327
13,009
438
Atlanta, GA
#15
I wish there were a third party candidate with a great sense of humor who would just run against Obama 2012 with the promises Obama 2008 made, to the letter. It would be hilarious to watch him debate himself.
The look on Obama's face would be priceless.

 

MayrMeninoCrash

Liberal Psycopath
Dec 9, 2004
24,922
8,997
763
Loveland, CO
#16
I think Gitmo is the best evidence we've got about that old comedy bit, where a new President is taken into a secret room and the truth is told to him by a cabal of shadowy folks. I fully believe Obama intended to close Gitmo, but once faced with the reality from the insiders, thought better of the plan.
 

Norm Stansfield

私は亀が好きだ。
Mar 17, 2009
15,949
4,075
328
#17
I think Gitmo is the best evidence we've got about that old comedy bit, where a new President is taken into a secret room and the truth is told to him by a cabal of shadowy folks. I fully believe Obama intended to close Gitmo, but once faced with the reality from the insiders, thought better of the plan.
I'm sure Obama fully believed everything he said in '08. That's what makes appealing to "I fully believe" so retarded. That it doesn't mean anything. Some people can fully believe whatever suits them, when it suits them, and then the next second fully believe the opposite, if that's what suits them.

That's how Obama's full belief works. It has nothing to do with any cabals, just a change in convenience and the absence of a strong mind or character.
 

Hudson

Supreme Champion!!!!!
Donator
Jan 14, 2002
32,840
4,566
898
Land of misfit toys
#18
Obama is a piece of shit with no respect for the Constitution. What else is new?
Wait....What?....Terrorists....war criminals...thought they were tried under different rules of law. I haven't slept in 48 hours so..I'm punchy at best.