Implications of Hamdan SCOTUS Case

By  | 

SCOTUS blog has this:

Even more importantly for present purposes, the Court held that Common Article 3 of Geneva aplies as a matter of treaty obligation to the conflict against Al Qaeda. That is the HUGE part of today’s ruling. The commissions are the least of it. This basically resolves the debate about interrogation techniques, because Common Article 3 provides that detained persons “shall in all circumstances be treated humanely,” and that “[t]o this end,” certain specified acts “are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever”â€â€?including “cruel treatment and torture,” and “outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment.” This standard, not limited to the restrictions of the due process clause, is much more restrictive than even the McCain Amendment.

The conclusion? Our official policy for the treatment of the detainees is illegal.


As Sully points out, could this be “The End of Torture?”

Or, as PoliPundit puts it, does this signal that we’ve surrendered to Al Qaeda? (heh.)

And will Bush and Congress override this decision as the Counterterrorism Blog suggests?