ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Law Students Blogs -> Nuts & Boalts

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Law Students

: Nuts & Boalts

My Anthony

ADVERTISEMENTS
First, only a fool would call Justice Kennedy a liberal (frequently conservative blogs in fact do use that label). So let's not get carried away. But in both Boumediene and today in Kennedy v. Louisiana, Justice Kennedy authored a sweeping opinion enshrining the rights to habeas and the right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. In that sense, he is upholding the traditional conservative (or classical liberal) view of true limited government that has articulated limits in its dealing with its subjects. This is of course to be distinguished from the modern GOP which supports limiting government when it helps those who vote for the other party and expanding government when it crushes those who stand in your way.

Reading Justice Kennedy's recitation of the history of The Great Writ and its importance, I remembered this NPR program where Prof. Volokh made an appearance following the Padilla and Hamdi decisions. There, he argues that the decision can be carried to far, to the point where during WWII Nazis could have filed habeas petitions and clogged our courts. (See also this post describing the hypo). Listen to it starting around the 25 minute mark. It's really fascinating (e.g., "If the actual war in Iraq continued, we may have taken thousands of prisoners"). I wasn't even a law student at the time, but I realized that the hypothetical only makes sense if you accept the administrations view that it can create a group of people who are not entitled to any rights, hold them indefinitely, deprive them of their right to counsel, to confront witnesses, to torture them, etc. If, however, common article III and other provisions of the GC apply to those who fight even out of uniform, then their status must be determined by an impartial tribunal. I do wonder where Prof. Volokh's views lie now. Four years have passed, half the prisoners in GTMO at the time have been released, mistreatment of prisoners ran rampant, there has not been any effective means of fairly determining the status of the prisoners, the GWOT is not anywhere near ending.

Full post as published by Nuts & Boalts on June 25, 2008 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0167 secs (new cache)