More on the Hamdan Decision...

Common Sense at War by Ronald Cass
5 Wrong Justices by John Yoo
Five Wrong Symposium: John Eastman, Julian Ku and Ed Whelen
NRO Editorial from the Editors

We are not, unfortunately, unfamiliar with law by judicial fiat, but, according to some, this is a first: a treaty invented and implemented by judicial fiat. In this case, a Treaty with Terrorists. One that the terrorists are not required to, nor have any intention of, honoring.

I am not a Constitutional expert, but I'm pretty sure negotiating treaties (or spinning them out of candy-floss) isn't one of the powers the Founders assigned the Supreme Court.

I believe in the Rule of Law. But the law applies to the Supreme Court as well as everybody else. They are not above the Constitution. They are not allowed to invent, distort, undermine or change it. And when they do, they break the law; they defy the law. Therefore, in order to preserve the law it may become necessary to defy the Court. What was it Andrew Jackson is supposed to have said? "That's their decision, let's see them enforce it!"

Some may agree with insular and arrogant Justices who declare, "The Constitution means what we say it means." But most don't. There are, no doubt, subtle constitutional questions in some cases which require subtle reasoning to navigate, but the blatant usurping of the powers and prerogatives of another branch of government ain't subtle. And in such cases, even we, the unwashed masses, as with pornography, know unconstitutional when we see it!

The Gunslinger