High Court Sides With Terroists

That nice document sitting under that bullet proof glass for millions to see each year is indeed an artifact. Sometimes I wonder if there are any copies available for the Federal Government, in particular the U.S. Supreme Court.

Yesterday the High Court ruled "that President Bush overstepped his authority in ordering military war crimes trials for Guantanamo Bay detainees." Apparently, the Court believes that enemy combatants deserve Constitutional rights or at least be covered under the Geneva Convention. One author (I think Mark Lavin) stated that the Court has formed a treaty with Terrorists that no one has yet signed onto but the Court.

When will American wake up and realize that the Supreme Court is not the only branch that may interpret the constitution. Abraham Lincoln once stated in reference to the Dredd Scott case:

"I do not forget the position assumed by some that Constitutional questions are to be decided by the Supreme Court....At the same time, the candid citizen must confess that if the policy of the Government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made...the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having...resigned their Government into the hands of the eminent tribunal....

Intelligence, patriotism, Christianity, and a firm reliance on Him who has yet forsaken this favored land, are still competent to adjust in the best way all our difficulty."

Would it not be fantastic that the other two branches of government (you know, the two that actually legislate and sign into law legislation) told the Supreme Court to "stick it in your ear"? Since Bush has decided to allow himself to be hamstrung by a runaway Court in a time of war (a court that commits greater acts of Treason than the New York Times), I suppose he could ask that all enemy combatants be released into "safe houses" next door to each of the Justices. Then again, why would Terrorists bomb their allies?