Obama's Increasingly Unpopular Guantánamo Bay Decision
By Robert Schlesinger, Thomas Jefferson Street blog
Peter Roff blogged today in part about the notion of Guantánamo Bay prisoners creating legal mischief upon being brought to the United States for trial. I am skeptical of this particular line of argument (I live in Alexandria, Va., and would be delighted to see the guilty so declared in the local federal courthouse). But a new Rasmussen poll shows that the GOP may have some traction on the issue.
According to the poll, 36 percent of Americans agree with Obama's decision to close the Guantánamo Bay facility, while 46 percent oppose closing the camp. Voters were evenly divided on the question in late January, so to the extent people are paying attention, it looks like the GOP may be making headway here. Another key data point: that voters placed safety over "fairness" in determining where terrorism suspects are released by a factor of 75 percent to 17 percent. "Fairness" is an awfully squishy word, but that's a big margin.
To the extent this issue keeps trending against Obama, it could become a serious problem for him: His base are strongly in favor of closing Guantánamo, so a strong disconnect between them and the general electorate will provide a big target for Republicans.
Fully 75 percent of respondents opposed the Gitmo prisoners being released in the United States, while only 13 percent wanted it.
On Facebook? You can keep up with Thomas Jefferson Street blog postings through Facebook's Networked Blogs.
- Read more by Robert Schlesinger.
- Read more from the Thomas Jefferson Street blog.
- Read more about Guantánamo Bay.
Tags: Barack Obama | Guantánamo Bay
Tools: 
Share
|
| Comments (11) | Print
Reader Comments
Release of Club Gitmo detainees in the US?
To the thirteen percent of you who actually desire this: WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU SMOKING?
terrorrist thinking
as i see the things happening here and there in the world,i closely watch it.I have been to saudi Arabia and i have seen good and bad thinking of muslims.I can assure you that many of the muslims hate west just because of no reasons at all.most of them are illiterate and they are more vanurable to these thinking.Even if you give a lot to them,still they will be your enemy later.Take an example of Afganistan.America supported them to throw out Russian influence there,but now America is suffering from there.The mind set up of these people will not be changed easily.Obama will learn lessons later if he is too lose on them now.I
Applicability of The Constitution
TO MIKE ASH (Your Reply Sir):
How about in the Preamble itself:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
To correct your premise, I DID NOT say the Constitution only "applied" to citizens. What I said was that the US Constitution "governs" US citizens. Obviously, short of intervention by foreign states with reciprocal embessary agreements, criminal acts by foreign nationalists on US soil can be tried in State and Federal courts. My point was the fact that the Gitmo detainees, who are prisoners of war, can not be held or detained in any US prison without the requirement of determining the applicability of the protection of Habeous Corpus, as granted in Section 9 - Limits On Congress.
It is interesting to note, however, that both Section 9 and Amendment 5 allow for detention in special cases, wartime included, when public safety may be at risk. Section 9 states "The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it." Amendment 5 states in part, "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger..." As you know, or I presume you know, Amendment 5 is part of the Bill of Rights ratified December 15, 1791. Clearly, even the anti-federalist delegates envisioned a need to suspend Habeas Corpus in cases of foreign prisoners of war. Obviously, the privilege of Habeas Corpus becomes far removed if those prisoners are detained outside Federal Jurisdiction. This is why your enemies Bush and Cheney wisely chose to hold the Muslim terrorists in Guantanamo.
So there you go, Mike. There's your evidence strait from The Constitution itself. Care to make another stab at it?
advertisement
