4.04.2006
Justices, 6-3, Sidestep Ruling on Padilla Case (NYTimes.com)
By DAVID STOUT
Published: April 3, 2006
WASHINGTON, April 3 — A sharply split Supreme Court today rejected an appeal from the terrorism suspect Jose Padilla, leaving undecided for now deeper questions about the Bush administration's handling of detainees since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
Six justices were sufficiently persuaded, at least for the time being, that Mr. Padilla's appeal is moot, since he was transferred from military custody to a civilian jail several months ago and is to go on trial. The federal government indicted him last fall on terrorism charges that could bring him a sentence of life in prison if he is convicted.
The administration had argued that since Mr. Padilla was going to get a trial, there was no need for the Supreme Court to rule on his appeal of a lower court order upholding the administration's authority to keep him in open-ended military detention as an enemy combatant.
The six justices who agreed today to defer consideration of the finding of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit were Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices John Paul Stevens, Anthony M. Kennedy, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr.
But there were hints of an internal struggle among the justices. For one thing, several justices took the somewhat unusual step of issuing opinions related to the court's order not to take a case. More commonly, when refusing to take a case, the court simply issues an order without comment.
The three justices who said the Supreme Court should have taken the case were Ruth Bader Ginsburg, David H. Souter and Stephen G. Breyer.
(More ... Justices, 6-3, Sidestep Ruling on Padilla Case - New York Times) ¶ 08:00
Published: April 3, 2006
WASHINGTON, April 3 — A sharply split Supreme Court today rejected an appeal from the terrorism suspect Jose Padilla, leaving undecided for now deeper questions about the Bush administration's handling of detainees since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
Six justices were sufficiently persuaded, at least for the time being, that Mr. Padilla's appeal is moot, since he was transferred from military custody to a civilian jail several months ago and is to go on trial. The federal government indicted him last fall on terrorism charges that could bring him a sentence of life in prison if he is convicted.
The administration had argued that since Mr. Padilla was going to get a trial, there was no need for the Supreme Court to rule on his appeal of a lower court order upholding the administration's authority to keep him in open-ended military detention as an enemy combatant.
The six justices who agreed today to defer consideration of the finding of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit were Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices John Paul Stevens, Anthony M. Kennedy, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr.
But there were hints of an internal struggle among the justices. For one thing, several justices took the somewhat unusual step of issuing opinions related to the court's order not to take a case. More commonly, when refusing to take a case, the court simply issues an order without comment.
The three justices who said the Supreme Court should have taken the case were Ruth Bader Ginsburg, David H. Souter and Stephen G. Breyer.
(More ... Justices, 6-3, Sidestep Ruling on Padilla Case - New York Times) ¶ 08:00
