The Bush Administration just can't get away from the notion that if it decides you are a terrorist, you have no rights, not even the right to contest your terrorist status. The latest episode in this struggle is the refusal of the administration to even consider allowing defendants on trial for terrorism to see the evidence against them. The Justice Department, in the wake of Hamdi, is drawing up rules and procedures for trials and ignoring the input of military lawyers that permitting secret evidence in trial is a violation of the Geneva Accords and risks being declared unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The idea that the government can declare you a terrorist and strip you of your rights without recourse strikes at the very heart of the American idea of justice. We rebelled against the British in great part because of the abuses of executive power. Bush wants to find the Guantanimo prisoners guilty before trial, and convert what should be fair and impartial trials into mockeries of justice. For extensive background on the right to confrontation against one's accusers, see Justice Scalia's opinion in Crawford v. Washington, in which the Supreme Court affirmed the absolute right of a defendant to cross-examine his accusers in open court.

Once again, Bush believes that he is above the law. Can the republic survive this administration? Are enough people even concerned?

The Boston Globe: Military Lawyers See Limits on Trial Input (The title is deceiving. The article discusses Bush's intention of dominating the workings of the military courts, including the independence of military lawyers.)