The news and blogosphere have been abuzz with rumors that the Obama Administration might reconsider its plans to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in civilian court and opt instead to proceed in a military tribunal. The New York Times has a good summary of the general news reporting around the issue here.
I've talked before about the constitutional reasons Khalid Sheikh Mohammed should be tried in civilian court. (I talked about New York, since that was the plan at the time. He could also be tried in DC or Pennsylvania, the other sites of 9/11 attacks.)
Even though New York is now looking like an extremely unlikely venue, given the opposition of local governmental officials, Mohammed should still be tried in a civilian federal court. Both for constitutional reasons (the arguments for which I think are clear) as well as for policy reasons. Trying Mohammed in civilian court would send a clear message to Americans and to the world at large: even when dealing with major threats, America is a country governed by war.
I've talked before about the constitutional reasons Khalid Sheikh Mohammed should be tried in civilian court. (I talked about New York, since that was the plan at the time. He could also be tried in DC or Pennsylvania, the other sites of 9/11 attacks.)
Even though New York is now looking like an extremely unlikely venue, given the opposition of local governmental officials, Mohammed should still be tried in a civilian federal court. Both for constitutional reasons (the arguments for which I think are clear) as well as for policy reasons. Trying Mohammed in civilian court would send a clear message to Americans and to the world at large: even when dealing with major threats, America is a country governed by war.
No comments:
Post a Comment
I encourage commenters to use their real name, although I do not require it.
Blogger employs an automatic spam filtering algorithm for comments. If a non-spam comment has been filtered out, email source4politics@gmail.com and the issue will be investigated.