More of the Same

This week saw BushCheney proposing new procedures for trying enemy combatants. Recall that the Supreme Court struck down a previous set of procedures. The new proposals attempt to address the Court’s objections.

Except they don’t. In fact, the new proposals are little different from the old ones as reported by both National Public Radio and the Washington Post. Particularly egregious is the proposal that would prevent defendants from confronting evidence used against them.
This provision and allowing evidence obtained through torture particularly disturb the Judge Advocates General of the military services.

Perhaps most telling is an exchange in the audio report from NPR. When asked by a member of the House Armed Services Committee if such procedures would be acceptable to the administration if used to try American soldiers by another country, Acting Assistant Attorney General Steven Bradbury replied in the negative. Apparently the United States is exceptional in this regard as far as this adminstration is concerned.

So here we have an Executive asserting powers that voilate one of the most basic American legal rights and insisting that Congress enact its proposal on the double quick. It seems dubious to me. But don't just take my word for it. Two articles in Slate also raise questions about the proposals. Dahlia Lithwick calls for a discussion of the cost to liberty and the benefits of such proposals. Emily Bazelon examines the restrictions on habeas corpus contained BushCheney is asking for.

None of this bodes well for either civil liberty or security.