Habeas Corpus for Guantanamo Bay Prisoners

Eric Francis makes sense out of all of this insanity here on Earth. He seems to capture a certain order about it that, to me, never made sense before. The way he uses astrology to understand how politics affects us, how our personalities can affect us and how we can understand ourselves better — and thus make our relationships with others better — is what drives me to learn more from him. Every day it’s a fascinating journey that feels right and true with my soul and my heart; they both grow in understanding as I walk upon this earth. He is a great teacher to me and I seek out his pages every day. I am a proud supporter of Planet Waves. Jamie

Dear Friend and Reader:

Last Thursday, the U.S. Supreme Court made a stunning decision regarding the status of prisioners in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, an American military base. It ruled in favor of Habeas Corpus, meaning the prisoners have rights: particularly, the right to a fair trial.

Following September 11, 2001, President Bush and his administration stripped the rights of captured prisoners from Afghanistan, and elsewhere, who are held under suspicion of terrorism. They have been kept in Guantanamo Bay indefinitely and without court hearings. According to the New York Times, Guantanamo Bay currently has 270 prisoners. The administration placed these people in Cuba because they believed Habeas Corpus — the right to a fair trial under U.S. law — would not extend to prisoners held in foreign waters.

Planet Waves’ own civil rights attorney, Steve Bergstein, has written a clear and concise article on the Supreme Court decision. I’ve included it below.

Eric Francis will return to writing for Daily Astrology and Adventure on June 20. Until then, I’ll be here with daily news in astrology and beyond, the aspects and the Oracle. Please continue to submit your responses to: “What is Planet Waves?” It’s the highlight of my day reading your emails. My address is: editorial -at- planetwaves.net

See you tomorrow,

Rachel Asher

Even George W. Bush Cannot Destroy Habeas Corpus
By Steve Bergstein

I always wondered how the United States got away with establishing a detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. That’s Cuba! Enemy territory! I can understand why the United States wants a base there. Our government has bases everywhere. But why does Cuba put up with it? Maybe because the country that has tried to kill Fidel Castro many times has the muscle to put bases and detention centers wherever it pleases.

But all the military might in the world can’t stop the Constitution from applying to Guantanamo Bay. That’s because the Executive Branch, where the President does his business, was reigned in on Thursday by the U.S. Supreme Court, which held that even enemy combatants and detainees can challenge their detention under the Habeas Corpus rules which protect everyone else in U.S. territory.

Habeas Corpus is a latin phrase which means that you can ask a court to review the legality of your detention. It’s one of the oldest legal concepts in Western Civilization. It’s what separates the free from the oppressed, and when I say oppressed, I mean OPPRESSED, those who live under totalitarian regimes and can be swept off the streets for no reason and without any recourse. Without Habeas Corpus you can spend years in jail simply because you held different political views, or some other frivolous reason. No matter how bad the Bush administration or any other tyrant abuses power in the American political system, there’s always Habeas Corpus.

Here is a summary of the ruling by the New York Times’ excellent Supreme Court reporter, Linda Greenhouse:

The Supreme Court on Thursday delivered its third consecutive rebuff to the Bush administration’s handling of the detainees at Guantánamo Bay, ruling 5 to 4 that the prisoners there have a constitutional right to go to federal court to challenge their continued detention.

The court declared unconstitutional a provision of the Military Commissions Act of 2006 which, at the administration’s behest, stripped the federal courts of jurisdiction to hear habeas corpus petitions from the detainees seeking to challenge their designation as enemy combatants.

Congress and the administration had passed a shortened alternative to a habeas procedure for the prisoners in the 2005 Detainee Treatment Act. But Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, writing for the majority, said that procedure “falls short of being a constitutionally adequate substitute” because it failed to offer “the fundamental procedural protections of habeas corpus.”

Justice Kennedy declared: “The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times.”

The decision . . . was categorical in its rejection of the administration’s basic arguments. Indeed, the court repudiated the fundamental legal basis for the administration’s strategy, adopted in the immediate aftermath of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, of housing prisoners captured in Afghanistan and elsewhere at the United States Naval base in Cuba, where Justice Department lawyers advised the White House that domestic law would never reach.

Here’s the opinion, for those who care to muddle through the legal jargon.

For international human rights lawyers, the decision handed down by the Supreme Court is groundbreaking, like Roe v. Wade for abortion rights activists or Brown v. Board of Education for domestic civil rights lawyers. What’s most interesting is that the Court sees right through the justification for locating the detention center in another country. That tactic does not mean that the U.S. Constitutional protections of Habeas Corpus cannot apply.

The Supreme Court is consistently striking down the Bush administration’s contorted legal rationales for the treatment of detainees in the War on Terror. This brings us back to Civics 101: separation of powers, a concept we all learned about but never really paid attention to. In fact, we would laugh at the concept that one branch is not allowed to get too powerful and that each branch of government (Executive, Legislative and Judicial) serves as a check on each other. It all seemed so quaint. Schoolkids got the point, but was this rock-paper-scissors theory really useful in real life? It is now. As one commentator notes in quoting from the opinion, “Even though the two political branches — the President and Congress — had agreed to take away the detainees’ habeas rights, [Justice] Kennedy said those branches do not have ‘the power to switch the Constitution on or off at will.'”

The moral of the story is that the Bush presidency is out of control, and has done whatever it pleased in the name of security and, of course, politics. Separation of powers is no longer a cute theory of government. It prevents this country from falling into the abyss completely.

Today’s Aspects

Monday 16 June 2008

Amor (18+ Taurus) semisquare Kronos (3+ Cancer)
Mars (20+ Leo) opposite Chiron (20+ Aquarius Rx)
Venus (27+ Gemini) sesquiquadrate Psyche (12+ Scorpio Rx)
Mars (20+ Leo) square Sedna (20+ Taurus)
Mercury (13+ Gemini Rx) opposite Ixion (13+ Sagittarius Rx)
Mars (21+ Leo) septile Atlantis (12+ Libra)
Mars (21+ Leo) trine Juno (21+ Sagittarius Rx)
Venus (27+ Gemini) septile Asbolus (6+ Taurus)
Sun (25+ Gemini) semisquare Pallas (10+ Taurus)
Venus (28+ Gemini) sextile Orcus (28+ Leo)
Arachne (2+ Libra) square Ceres (2+ Cancer)

Today’s Oracle takes us to July 1, 1999 – LIBRA – Monthly

I get the idea that you are struggling to change your mind about something large and overwhelming, and yet also very personal. I don’t know what it is, and it could be a meta-theme that affects numerous aspects of your existence. But I can give some general lines of approach to the process. Using astrology itself as a metaphor, consider that this craft involves exploring existence through most technical analysis of data (traditionally a Virgo process) alternately with, or simultaneously with, surrendering to the most etheric influences of soul and cosmos (traditionally a Pisces process). Composing music or creating art works the same way; full expression is achieved through what is at once mystical and highly disciplined. In the coming two months, I suggest honoring art as a divine process. Listen to music as if it was a direct expression of religious wisdom; consider lyrics over and over again, as a rabbi would read the Torah; view visual art with awe and wonder and as a direct window to the universe. If you practice daily, it will help — help, that is, to move your soul to the act of creation itself. And only this will save you.