![]() |
By Bob Geiger (about the author) Page 3 of 4 page(s)
Limiting the Authority of the President to Interpret the Geneva Conventions and Mandating Congressional and Judicial Oversight
If there's been one president in my lifetime that I don't want interpreting the college football rankings, much less something serious, it's George W. Bush and one of the scariest parts of the MCA is the power it gives Bush in deciding for himself what the Geneva Conventions mean.
According to the MCA:As provided by the Constitution and by this section, the President has the authority for the United States to interpret the meaning and application of the Geneva Conventions and to promulgate higher standards and administrative regulations for violations of treaty obligations which are not grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions.
Dodd's bill simply strikes the italicized part above about Bush interpreting the Geneva Conventions and replaces it with this:"... the President has the authority, subject to congressional oversight and judicial review, to promulgate higher standards and administrative regulations for violations of treaty obligations which are not grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions.
That modification -- now that we'll have a Congress that will actually perform oversight -- should make about 300 million Americans sleep better at night.
The amended law would also say that Bush will issue "standards" and not "interpretations" on the Geneva Conventions.
Providing for Expedited Judicial Review of the Military Commissions Act
This is an entirely new section inserted by Dodd, saying that findings under the MCA must be reviewed by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and that an appeal can be made all the way to the Supreme Court.
Here's the new stuff that keeps the Bush administration from being able to detain you forever without trial:"An interlocutory or final judgment, decree, or order of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in an action under paragraph(1) shall be reviewable as a matter of right by direct appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States. Any such appeal shall be taken by a notice of appeal filed within 10 days after the date on which such judgment, decree, or order is entered. The jurisdictional statement with respect to any such appeal shall be filed within 30 days after the date on which such judgment, decree, or order is entered.
This is another big step in neutralizing the MCA and taking us back to the good old days of the Sixth Amendment which says we are entitled to "... a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury."
"It shall be the duty of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and the Supreme Court of the United States to advance on the docket and to expedite to the greatest possible extent the disposition of any action or appeal, respectively, brought under this section."
"I believe that the United States Congress made a crucial mistake," said Dodd about the lack of this wording in the MCA. " And that is why the final provision in my bill is perhaps the most important one -- it will ensure that each of the provisions of the Administration's Military Commission Act is quickly reviewed by our nation's courts, and appropriately evaluated for their constitutionality."
So there you have it -- that's the gist of how enormously important just 10 short pages of Democratic legislation can be to our country in reversing what the Republicans did to the Constitution in September.
Sadly, it looks unlikely that it will pass, based on the fact that, even with Democrats controlling both houses of Congress, Bush will almost certainly exercise his veto power and it's a longshot that a super-majority can be achieved in the House and Senate to override Bush's veto. But it will at least renew the dialog and get Americans thinking more about our country's creed.
The "short title" of Senator Dodd's legislation is the ''Military Commission Civil Liberties Restoration Act'' and that's about as apt as it can possibly be.
When the MCA was passed, George Washington University Professor of Constitutional Law, Jonathan Turley, said that most Americans "don't realize what a fundamental change this is about who we are as a country."
"People have no idea how significant this is. What, really, a time of shame this is for the American system," said Turley. "What the Congress did and what the president signed today essentially revokes over 200 years of American principles and values."
And Dodd, whose father was a prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trials, ended his floor speech on his legislation by reinforcing the importance of a nation maintaining its long-held ideals, regardless of temporary dangers.
http://bobgeiger.blogspot.com
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
View Authors' Articles |
| 1 comments |
Want to post your own comment on this Article?
|
||||
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |