I find it amazing and appalling how many people are up in arms about this decision. Either they don’t understand it, or they haven’t thought about it. Or perhaps they don’t really care about our Constitution or liberty.
Of course, the Court didn’t help things by writing a 158 page decision. It could have been written in less than half a page. Perhaps if they had written the following, this controversy would have been avoided:
The United States government was created by the Constitution. The government is required to follow the Constitution at all times and under all circumstances.
The Constitution clearly says that the Congress may only suspend habeas corpus if the United States is being invaded or undergoing rebellion and even then they may suspend it only to the extent necessary for public safety. The United States is not being invaded or undergoing rebellion. Therefore, Congress has no authority to suspend habeas corpus.
On the question of jurisdiction, it is well settled law that Congress may not use their authority to set the jurisdiction of the courts to shield an otherwise unconstitutional law from review. This would make a mockery of the limits imposed by the Constitution.
Some may argue that this decision may have a detrimental effect on the country’s ability to wage war. This argument is not persuasive for a number of reasons. (1) Congress has not declared war and therefore the question does not arise in the instant case. (2) In the event of a declared war, the government would need only refer to the declaration of war in response to a writ of habeas corpus. (3) The government must obey the Constitution even in war. Since the Constitution does not list war as a condition under which habeas corpus can be suspended, we must conclude that the government cannot suspend habeas corpus even for prisoners of war.
