War position shapes lawmakers’ view of ruling

NEWS ANALYSIS:

Whether politicians considered Thursday’s Supreme Court ruling on Guantanamo Bay Naval Base detainees a victory for terrorists or for the Constitution was largely determined by their substantive stance on the war in Iraq.

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, California Republican, said the decision will “hamper the ability to prevent a massive murder of our civilians.”

“This is a setback for those who have made battling the war on terrorism their first priority,” said Mr. Rohrabacher, a supporter of the war since the earliest post-Sept. 11 debates on overthrowing Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.

But Rep. Edward J. Markey, Massachusetts Democrat, called the ruling “a stunning repudiation of the hubris and legal contortions of the Bush administration.”

“The Supreme Court has reaffirmed what we are all taught from grammar school on: that the United States is a nation of laws and that our Constitution and Bill of Rights must be respected,” said Mr. Markey, who has voted against funding the war and favors an immediate withdrawal from Iraq.

The reactions of both parties’ presumed presidential nominees also mirrored their general stances on the Iraq war.

Sen. Barack Obama, Illinois Democrat, said the decision “ensures we can protect our nation and bring terrorists to justice, while also protecting our core values.”

“This is an important step toward reestablishing our credibility as a nation committed to the rule of law and rejecting the false choice between fighting terrorism and respecting habeas corpus,” he said in a statement on his campaign site. Mr. Obama has emphasized repeatedly on the campaign stump that he opposed to war, unlike many congressional Democrats, even before it began.

Campaigning in Boston, Sen. John McCain told reporters he worries about giving habeas corpus rights to enemy combatants, but the former Vietnam War prisoner also emphasized his longstanding opposition to torture, saying he supports closing the detention center at Guantanamo.

“These are unlawful combatants, they are not American citizens and I think we should pay attention to [Chief Justice John G.] Roberts’ opinion in this decision,” Mr. McCain said, referring to the chief justice’s dissent. “But it is a decision that the Supreme Court has made. Now we need to move forward. As you know I always favored closing Guantanamo Bay and I still think we ought to do that.”

The Arizona Republican supported President Bush’s troop surge when the Iraq war was at the depths of its popularity, staking his presidential bid on his hawkish stance and saying he would “rather lose an election than lose a war.”

While lawmakers and candidates readily weighed in on the landmark decision, the agencies charged with fighting terrorists said little.

The Department of Defense referred calls to the Department of Justice, which released a statement saying, the agency is “disappointed” with the decision, but added that military tribunal trials will go forward.

In a 5-4 ruling, the court decided detainees at Guantanamo Bay have the right to challenge the legality of their incarcerations in federal courts using a process known as habeas corpus. Previously, those military tribunals were the only courts that could hear detainees’ cases.

Story Continues →