Return to Normalcy - At Least for the Judicial Branch

I got a chuckle out of this OpEd by Krauthammer:

But, of course, the war on terrorism is different. The enemy is shadowy, scattered and therefore more likely to survive and keep the war going for years. What the Supreme Court essentially did in Hamdan was to say to the president: Time's up. We gave you the customary half-decade of emergency powers, but that's as far as we go. From now on the emergency is over, at least judicially, and you're going to have to operate by peacetime rules.

Or, as Justice Anthony Kennedy, the new Sandra Day O'Connor, put it, Guantanamo (and by extension, war-on-terrorism) jurisprudence must henceforth be governed by "the customary operation of the Executive and Legislative Branches." This case may be "of extraordinary importance," but it is to be "resolved by ordinary rules."

All rise: The Supreme Court has decreed a return to normality. A lovely idea, except that al-Qaeda has other ideas. The war does go on. One can sympathize with the court's desire for a Harding-like restoration to normalcy. But the robed eminences are premature. And even if they weren't, they really didn't have to issue a ruling this bad.

From this point of view, which I agree with, the Judicial branch has decided to stand outside of reality. Or more likely, have decided that they will define reality from the bench. Unfortunately, this type of decision will handicap the executive branch in dealing with terrorism into the future.

And what happens if there is another attack from a known party? Does the Judicial branch truly believe that the president will no longer have the Article 2 powers to defend the country? I suppose we'll just have to wait for the lethargic Judicial system to rule on that point.

But no matter. Logic has little place here. The court has decreed: There is no war -- or we will pretend so -- and henceforth it shall be conducted by the court. God save the United States. (This honorable court can fend for itself.)