Hamdi v Runsfeld Political Question

337 Words2 Pages
Randy Kleeman POLS 208 Prof. LaRowe Reflective paper 2 Hamdi v Rumsfeld: Was This a Political Question? I feel that this is/should have been a political question left for the Executive Branch; but I understand the hard decision that consumed our upper chain with this case along with other enemy combatants/detainees that are in the correction system. Being privileged to hear a few cases that went through military tribunals down in GITMO, I feel the way our system gives enemy combatants/detainees the rights that we as Americans get preposterous. Hearing a case and keeping America safe during war is a job for the Executive branch alone, no cases should have been heard until the war was over. Habeas Corpus shouldn’t have been brought up here, being an American citizen you have this right along with due process, but once you fight on the side of the opposition you should renounce such rights. To hear one case just because someone was born in the United States is not right to the other detainees that were caught alongside Hamdi. Enemy combatants are given certain rights to counsel now and I feel that the same outcome could have been reached if the Supreme Court would have remained out of this case. The Executive Branch should have optimal preference on proceedings about enemy combatants/detainees. The President is our Commander in Chief, taking his powers away presses him not to be able to do his sworn duties to keep our nation safe. I feel the outcome in this case was a backwards push to the Executive Branch and the Courts. A better outcome could be possible with a change in the laws that govern us. One such law is a law that would take away certain rights if you are caught fighting against your birth country. Our country has seen such stripping of rights before and if we want to win this war a new law needs to be written against citizens that
Open Document