A Victory for the Rule of Law

From Discourse DB
Revision as of 16:45, September 18, 2006 by Yaron Koren (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

This is an opinion item.

Author(s) The New York Times editorial board
Source The New York Times
Date June 30, 2006
URL http://select.nytimes.com/search/restricted/article?res=F40D17F63F540C738FDDAF0894DE404482
Quote
Quotes-start.png "The Supreme Court's decision striking down the military tribunals set up to try the detainees being held in Guantánamo Bay is far more than a narrow ruling on the issue of military courts. It is an important and welcome reaffirmation that even in times of war, the law is what the Constitution, the statute books and the Geneva Conventions say it is -- not what the president wants it to be." Quotes-end.png


Add or change this opinion item's references


This item argues for the position Supreme Court was correct in its ruling on the topic Hamdan v. Rumsfeld.