Stupid Judicial Statements

The Millennium Bomber (Ahmed Ressam) was sentenced to 22 years. Kind of light I thought, but that isn't the point of this entry. Hugh Hewitt quotes the Judge (Coughenour) who sentenced him with the following statement:

The message I would hope to convey in today's sentencing is twofold:

"First, that we have the resolve in this country to deal with the subject of terrorism and people who engage in it should be prepared to sacrifice a major portion of their life in confinement.

"Secondly, though, I would like to convey the message that our system works. We did not need to use a secret military tribunal, or detain the defendant indefinitely as an enemy combatant, or deny him the right to counsel, or invoke any proceedings beyond those guaranteed by or contrary to the United States Constitution.

"I would suggest that the message to the world from today's sentencing is that our courts have not abandoned our commitment to the ideals that set our nation apart. We can deal with the threats to our national security without denying the accused fundamental constitutional protections.

"Despite the fact that Mr. Ressam is not an American citizen and despite the fact that he entered this country intent upon killing American citizens, he received an effective, vigorous defense, and the opportunity to have his guilt or innocence determined by a jury of 12 ordinary citizens.

"Most importantly, all of this occurred in the sunlight of a public trial. There were no secret proceedings, no indefinite detention, no denial of counsel.

"The tragedy of September 11th shook our sense of security and made us realize that we, too, are vulnerable to acts of terrorism.

"Unfortunately, some believe that this threat renders our Constitution obsolete. This is a Constitution for which men and women have died and continue to die and which has made us a model among nations. If that view is allowed to prevail, the terrorists will have won.

"It is my sworn duty, and as long as there is breath in my body I'll perform it, to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. We will be in recess."

Apparently judge Coughenour is trying to make a point about GITMO and the Military Tribunal process. I'd say that the judge should actually know what he's talking about or STFU.

Here's the problems that I see with his bench-side pontification.

• First: Ahmed Ressam was captured on US soil trying to kill US citizens. That put him in the jurisdiction of genius' like Coughenour. The GITMO detainees were captured in a theater of war as illegal combatants. I think Coughenour believes that his ilk should have jurisdiction here, but plainly the Supreme Court has stated otherwise.

• Second: The military tribunal system is not the horror that he seems to view it. The GITMO defendants will be allowed counsel. I pointed this out previously with this link to the DOD Military Commission Order No. 1. As to any of it being contrary to the Constitution, I suppose that he missed the Supreme Court findings, again.

• Third: Secret, in this case doesn't mean unjust. Nor does it mean without review. See the linked order. I suppose he has an interesting view of what constitutes "indefinite." I would wager that there have been US citizens detained for trial longer than some of the GITMO detainees. But for context he should maybe look to the detention periods of some of those war criminals held at the end of WWII.
  

Hugh has a decent piece there. I'm especially enamored with the fact that this jerk is a Reagan appointee.