The infamous detainees of Guantnamo, garbed in their bright orange
prison jumpsuits, have come to symbolize a host of controversial
policies and powers claimed by President George W. Bush in the
so-called war on terror. Designated as "enemy combatants," a
vaguely defined and previously unrecognized category in the
international laws of war, they have been at the center of a legal
firestorm challenging the Bush administration's conduct of the war.
Howard Ball, one of our nation's leading constitutional
authorities, takes a close look at the White House's defense of its
detainee program (what some have called an "American gulag"), the
court actions used to challenge that enormous expansion of
unchecked presidential power, and the potential threats to American
democracy should those actions ultimately fail. Focusing on the
Enemy Combatants Cases of 2004 and 2006-including Rasul v. Bush,
Hamdi v. Bush, Rumsfeld v. Padilla, and Hamdan v. Rumsfeld-Ball
examines competing legal arguments pitting the detainees'
fundamental human rights (including habeas corpus) against Bush's
proclamation that he alone has the authority to decide their fate,
as well as efforts by the Court and Congress to reclaim their own
authority in such matters.
Ball describes how the administration repeatedly found ways to
evade both the letter and spirit of the Court's decisions through
new legislation, presidential signing statements, and even
redefinition of the status of the detainees. He also examines the
official context of the cases--including the two Congressional
Authorizations for the Use of Military Force, the "Patriot Act,"
and the NSA's warrantless wiretapping program--as well as other
factors such as presidential claims to "state secrets privilege,"
the torture controversy, and the impact of the 2006 elections.
Ball's trenchant commentary reminds us once again that, in a
time of war, there will always be a great tension between the need
for security and the constitutional protection of due process for
all persons within the nation's jurisdiction. In assessing the Bush
administration's actions, his study underscores the significant
extent to which they have diminished those protections. Ultimately,
it tells a troubling story about the relationship between absolute
presidential power and the principles of representative government,
one that thoughtful readers cannot afford to ignore.
General
Is the information for this product incomplete, wrong or inappropriate?
Let us know about it.
Does this product have an incorrect or missing image?
Send us a new image.
Is this product missing categories?
Add more categories.
Review This Product
No reviews yet - be the first to create one!
Welcome to Loot.co.za!
Sign in / Register |Wishlists & Gift Vouchers |Help | Advanced search
