One More Piece Of Kindling For The Impeachment Pile.

NY Newsday reports:

Judge rejects argument that he is interfering with president's authority to wage war

By LARRY NEUMEISTER Associated Press Writer September 26, 2005, 3:40 PM EDT

NEW YORK -- A judge Monday rejected a government argument that he was interfering with the president's constitutional authority to wage war by insisting that Guantanamo Bay detainees be asked if they want their names to be made public. The government argument was asserted after U.S. District Judge Jed S. Rakoff last month ordered the Department of Defense to pose the question to detainees held at the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, naval base.

The judge wrote that the argument was without merit, and he said it was offered improperly after he had already rejected the government's other reasons for insisting that the information should not be released to The Associated Press.

(SNIP)

Guantanamo holds 520 prisoners; more than 230 others have been released or transferred to the custody of their home governments. Most were captured during the U.S. war in Afghanistan after the Sept. 11, 2001, attack. Only a few have been charged with crimes.

Why are we holding people, in some cases over four years without charge? I am not assuming their innocence or their guilt, but if you haven't found anything in OVER FOUR YEARS, then you are not finding anything period.

More important, this government makes a big to do about demanding other nations observe the rule of law. Who are we to flout it so capriciously?

The Bush administration designated them as enemy combatants, a classification that includes anyone who supported the Taliban or al-Qaida and which does not afford as many legal protections as prisoners of war under the Geneva Conventions. The designation allows indefinite detention without charges.

Again this administration has CHOSEN to turn the law on its head and the MSM just doesn't want to connect the dots. Forget the Geneva Conventions, for a moment and take a look at Title 18 Pt I Ch 113B of the US Code:

§242. Deprivation of rights under color of law

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

And.....

§ 2334. Jurisdiction and venue

(a) General Venue. Any civil action under section 2333 of this title against any person may be instituted in the district court of the United States for any district where any plaintiff resides or where any defendant resides or is served, or has an agent. Process in such a civil action may be served in any district where the defendant resides, is found, or has an agent.

(b) Special Maritime or Territorial Jurisdiction. If the actions giving rise to the claim occurred within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, as defined in section 7 of this title, then any civil action under section 2333 of this title against any person may be instituted in the district court of the United States for any district in which any plaintiff resides or the defendant resides, is served, or has an agent.

The job of the judiciary is to oversee and adjudicate the laws of this country. Their jurisdiction extends to the lowest of the low and even as high as the POTUS. Nor can the executive pick and choose which laws he wishes to follow.