{"id":358,"date":"2003-12-18T18:26:26","date_gmt":"2003-12-19T01:26:26","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2003-12-18T18:26:26","modified_gmt":"2003-12-19T01:26:26","slug":"a-thump-against-the-imperial-presidency","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/2003\/12\/18\/a-thump-against-the-imperial-presidency\/","title":{"rendered":"A Thump Against the Imperial Presidency"},"content":{"rendered":"

The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals rules against the government on Jose Padilla’s detention as an enemy combatant<\/a>:<\/p>\n

Contrary to the government’s argument, they said, the president does not have “inherent constitutional authority as Commander-in-Chief to detain American citizens on American soil outside a zone of combat.” <\/p>\n

While considerable “deference” must be given to the president’s authority, the court said the deference does not include allowing him to sidestep the federal courts and the Congress. <\/p>\n

Indeed, it said, “separation of powers concerns are heightened when the Commander-in-Chief’s powers are exercised in the domestic sphere.” <\/p>\n

The panel rejected the administration’s argument that a 1942 Supreme Court case involving the military tribunals during World War II supported the government’s position.<\/i><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals rules against the government on Jose Padilla’s detention as an enemy combatant: Contrary to the government’s argument, they said, the president does not have “inherent constitutional authority as Commander-in-Chief to detain American citizens on American soil outside a zone of combat.” While considerable “deference” must be given to the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":15,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"","_seopress_titles_title":"","_seopress_titles_desc":"","_seopress_robots_index":"","_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[676],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-358","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","tag-antiwar-movement"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"meta_box":{"disable_donate_message":"","custom_donate_message":"","subtitle":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/358","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/15"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=358"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/358\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=358"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=358"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=358"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=358"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}