Appellate court rejects Uigher transfer to US
posted at 12:15 pm on February 18, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Last October, Judge Ricardo Urbina ordered the release of 17 Gitmo detainees into the US, specifically his court, as a rebuke to the Bush administration. The Fourth Circuit stayed the order on appeal almost immediately, and today reversed it altogether. The appeals court threw out Urbina’s order, keeping the US from self-importing al-Qaeda terrorists:
A federal appeals court has overturned a ruling that would have transferred 17 Guantanamo Bay detainees to the United States.
The men are Turkic Muslims known as Uighurs. They have been cleared for release from Guantanamo, but the United States will not send them home to China for fear they will be tortured. So they remain in prison while the U.S. figures out what to do with them.
A federal judge ruled in October that the men should be transferred to U.S. soil because they were no longer enemy combatants and the government didn’t have the authority to hold them.
This is of a piece with the Abu Qatada decision in the UK today, a nice bit of synchronicity for the Anglosphere. For some odd reason, judges seem to think that Western societies have to apply due process to the extent of suicide. In both countries, the appellate process has apparently restored some common sense.
In this case, the reversal comes on something of a technicality, but one that hits at the heart of the problem. The court ruled that Urbina exceeded his authority by issuing an immigration order. The 4th Circuit ruled that only immigration officials can issue that kind of order. That makes the point that the executive branch, not the judiciary, has the responsibility for keeping the nation secure. It also underscores the point that the Uighers do not have the same due-process rights as do American residents — which is one reason why we don’t bring those detainees onto American soil.
Will the Obama administration continue to oppose Urbina’s efforts to free terrorists in the nation’s capital? That will be interesting to see.
Update: Andy McCarthy has more at The Corner as he reviews the opinion:
Justice Frankfurter summarized the law as it continues to this day: “Ever since national States have come into being, the right of the people to enjoy the hospitality of a State of which they are not citizens has been a matter of political determination by each State” – a matter “wholly outside the concern and competence of the Judiciary.”
He’s not sanguine that the majority on the Supreme Court will agree.
You must be logged in to post a comment.

















Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
Thank goodness there’s someone with sanity in the courts
Defector01 on February 18, 2009 at 12:17 PM
Are you ready for the
ShowcaseSupreme Court showdown?Dr.Cwac.Cwac on February 18, 2009 at 12:17 PM
Over/under on how many American flags Barry will stand before when addressing this?
Chuck Schick on February 18, 2009 at 12:21 PM
Sixteen.
OmahaConservative on February 18, 2009 at 12:25 PM
you mean the one with 57 stars on them?
grapeknutz on February 18, 2009 at 12:25 PM
In my dystopian vision I see the Uighers being allowed to run free in the US on welfare, and importing their families. When they do attack an American if they are harmed during the commission of their crime the American will be required to pay recompense.
Or maybe I’m just in a bad mood ’cause I’m on a no rat diet.
LincolntheHun on February 18, 2009 at 12:28 PM
When they do come will we have to pay their mortgages and medical expenses?
bbz123 on February 18, 2009 at 12:32 PM
Ed said:
These are the most important precedents set in the ruling.
Those that believe the (Gitmo) detainees should be allowed access to the same constitutional rights and protections that born-here citizens are blessed with….Just got a judicial bitch-slap across the face.
Talismen on February 18, 2009 at 12:40 PM
Uhhhhhh. “Fear?”
29Victor on February 18, 2009 at 12:41 PM
Dang. Guess I have to put away the hunting rifle.
rbj on February 18, 2009 at 12:46 PM
Justice Frankfurter your thoughts bring a smile to my face and hope knowing that some people of wisdom are out there in our government.
WashJeff on February 18, 2009 at 12:49 PM
uh, Justice Frankfurter passed away in the 60s and would not even recognize today’s Supreme Court.
james23 on February 18, 2009 at 1:06 PM
Of course. They’re entitled to the same taxpayer-financed goodies as all the other illegal aliens who’ve taken up residence here. Are these poor terrorists not “God’s children” too, you heartless, racist, bigoted, nativist? /
AZCoyote on February 18, 2009 at 1:08 PM
Judge Ricardo Urbina would claim that the Guantanamo detainees were being brainwashed with Islam while imprisoned by the US Government; that for them to appreciate America in all of its glory, they must be free to roam our streets to shock and awe our citizens with their mutual respect for liberty.
maverick muse on February 18, 2009 at 1:08 PM
Keep it on standby.
TexasDan on February 18, 2009 at 1:09 PM
Ed,
Why do you repeatedly refer to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit as the Fourth Circuit? These are different courts. In the past, several readers corrected you on this, but you persist; and frankly, to persist in error is to appear illiterate.
The Fourth Circuit has nothing to do with this case. The stay to which you refer was issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. (You may read the stay for yourself here.) Likewise, today’s decision came from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. (You may read the decision for yourself here.) These are the facts.
paul006 on February 18, 2009 at 1:26 PM
Um… silly question… but why don’t we send them back to China, instead of spending millions litigating this?
China is part of the UN. They signed the Geneva. They are a Nation State and it is NOT, under the UN Charter, our place to second guess the legal procedures of another sovereign state….
Instead… we twist our own highest law to try to figure out a way to keep these guys?
I just don’t get it.
Romeo13 on February 18, 2009 at 1:39 PM
I do believe we have a winner of the Hot Air trifecta
Bunsin on February 18, 2009 at 1:40 PM
Yes how dare you make a mistake twice!
Seriously Paul do you really think Ed is illiterate over this? Are you a clerk in the DC circuit or something…
Bunsin on February 18, 2009 at 1:47 PM
I still say that ALL GITMO guests should be released.
Required materials:
Navy issue 6 ft sea bag.
1 terrorist
Block of concrete
C-130 at 20000 feet over the ocean.
Done deal.
44Magnum on February 18, 2009 at 1:51 PM
But, but I thought that they were already being tortured at GITMO by Booosh and the Jooooos!
stefanite on February 18, 2009 at 1:58 PM
Don’t be silly Andy. It’s been a long time since the USSC has decided such issues based on law. The majority wouldn’t dream of embarassing “their president” Obama.
edshepp on February 18, 2009 at 2:48 PM
The word illiterate has more than one meaning. (You may wish to look it up.) One of its meanings is “ignorant in a particular subject or activity.” Over the years, I’ve noticed that Ed is particularly error-prone when he writes about legal or medical matters. It’s apparent that he’s not formally educated, or even well-read, in either field. (Of course, knowing what you’re talking about has never been a requirement for blogging! I know. I blog out of my backside all the time!)
But here, we’re talking about a readily correctable error in fact, one that several people have pointed out before. Probably Ed just doesn’t read the comments. But if he even read the articles he links to, he would discover his error.
And no, I don’t clerk for the D.C. Circuit.
paul006 on February 18, 2009 at 2:53 PM
“That will be interesting to see.”
And so will the manner by which the terrorist sleeper cells in ‘the US’ carry out the next, more massive attack. The true imperialists are looking to increase their territory so we may have to adjust to some nuclear fallout or maybe some bio/chem-weapons. Joe O’Biden and Al Hore had it right…this summer is gonna be HOT.
Christine on February 18, 2009 at 2:56 PM
Cheaper, that would be…
ladyingray on February 18, 2009 at 2:59 PM
The 17,000 troops Barry Whosane re-assigned to Afghanistan just may have to come home and do some clean up and some monitoring of the borders. Sometimes you gotta get nationalistic and protectionist…
Christine on February 18, 2009 at 2:59 PM
You claim these guys are “Al-Quaeda terrorists”? Am I missing something? These guys were cleared of any terrorism charges — by the Bush Administration.
Hal_10000 on February 18, 2009 at 5:27 PM
Comment pages: