New York Times Editorial - Signs of life in Congress
New York Times Editorial - Signs of life in Congress
Copyright by The New York Times
Published: July 9, 2006
The U.S. Congress, which is supposed to push back against executive attempts to amass overweening power, has hardly played its proper role when it comes to George W. Bush. In the past, when evidence arose that the president had overstepped his authority, the Congressional response was generally to look for ways to make whatever Bush did retroactively legal. But the Supreme Court's decision on the Guantánamo Bay detention camp seems to have jolted even some of the most loyal Republicans back to reality. They are vowing that this time they will not merely rubber-stamp presidential overreaching. Soon, the world will get a sense of how seriously to take this newfound spine.
The court ruled that Bush violated the Geneva Conventions and U.S. law when he created commissions to try detainees outside established judicial procedure. The court rejected Bush's claim of a power to handle prisoners any way he wants and said it was up to Congress to set rules.
This week, three Congressional committees will hold hearings on the issue. The White House predictably asked Congress simply to legalize Bush's policies. But a wide range of senators rejected that and called for a serious look at the basic question: whether and how rules should be changed to deal with terrorists who are not in any army.
The division here is not between people who want to win the war on terrorism and those who do not. It is between an executive branch that seems bent on proving that the president has unlimited power and those who believe that the Constitution and the rule of law did not crumble along with the World Trade Center.
We would not be in this mess if Bush had followed the rules. If he had allowed the screening of captives on the battlefield, which the military wanted and the Geneva Conventions require, hundreds of innocent men would never have been sent to Gitmo. If he had asked Congress to create tribunals some of those prisoners who really are terrorists might have been convicted by now.
Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, one of the Senate's experts on military law, put it just right the other day. "We don't need to change who we are to win the war," he said. "We need to create a system to meet the needs of a fair trial, the rights of the accused and the defense of the nation, that the world will see as fair and the nation can be proud of." We hope Congress follows that spirit.
Copyright by The New York Times
Published: July 9, 2006
The U.S. Congress, which is supposed to push back against executive attempts to amass overweening power, has hardly played its proper role when it comes to George W. Bush. In the past, when evidence arose that the president had overstepped his authority, the Congressional response was generally to look for ways to make whatever Bush did retroactively legal. But the Supreme Court's decision on the Guantánamo Bay detention camp seems to have jolted even some of the most loyal Republicans back to reality. They are vowing that this time they will not merely rubber-stamp presidential overreaching. Soon, the world will get a sense of how seriously to take this newfound spine.
The court ruled that Bush violated the Geneva Conventions and U.S. law when he created commissions to try detainees outside established judicial procedure. The court rejected Bush's claim of a power to handle prisoners any way he wants and said it was up to Congress to set rules.
This week, three Congressional committees will hold hearings on the issue. The White House predictably asked Congress simply to legalize Bush's policies. But a wide range of senators rejected that and called for a serious look at the basic question: whether and how rules should be changed to deal with terrorists who are not in any army.
The division here is not between people who want to win the war on terrorism and those who do not. It is between an executive branch that seems bent on proving that the president has unlimited power and those who believe that the Constitution and the rule of law did not crumble along with the World Trade Center.
We would not be in this mess if Bush had followed the rules. If he had allowed the screening of captives on the battlefield, which the military wanted and the Geneva Conventions require, hundreds of innocent men would never have been sent to Gitmo. If he had asked Congress to create tribunals some of those prisoners who really are terrorists might have been convicted by now.
Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, one of the Senate's experts on military law, put it just right the other day. "We don't need to change who we are to win the war," he said. "We need to create a system to meet the needs of a fair trial, the rights of the accused and the defense of the nation, that the world will see as fair and the nation can be proud of." We hope Congress follows that spirit.
posted by Carlos T Mock at 9:01 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home