U.S. Supreme Court Rules That Constitutional Rights Extend To Detainees At Guantanamo

Ruling inadvertently extends Constitutional rights to Illegal aliens considered foreigners

By H. Nelson Goodson

El Conquistador Newspaper

3206 W. National Ave.

Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53215

414-383-1000

conquistador@bizwi.rr.com

June 15, 2008

Milwaukee - On Thursday, the U.S. Supreme Court on a 5-4 ruled that enemy combatants being held in the Guantanamo Bay U.S. base in Cuba do have a right to file appeal cases challenging their indefinite detention without being charged in federal courts. The ruling sets precedent, despite President George W. Bush and his supporters determination to hold the combatants indefinitely. Most of the combatants in Guantanamo Bay are held in a military prison for up to six years without actually being charged of a crime against our nation.

Justice Anthony Kennedy for the majority of the justices wrote in the ruling, "The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times."

The Supreme Court decision has been the third time the justices have ruled against policies and laws created by President Bush to hold combatants indefinitely. The ruling sets a precedent that foreigners do have certain rights under the U.S. Constitution. Which the majority of the justices have inadvertently extended Constitutional rights to those persons identified as Illegal aliens under current immigration laws and are considered foreigners.

The decision by the justices will most likely affect the Lozano v. Hazleton case. In this case, the City of Hazleton filed an appeal on October 2007 in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia after U.S. District Judge James Munley in July 2007 ruled, Hazleton’s “Illegal Immigration Relief Act” unconstitutional. The ordinance sought to impose fines on landlords who rent to illegal immigrants and deny business permits to companies that give them jobs. It was considered as one of the most harshest City ordinances against undocumented immigrants in the United States.

Lawyers for the plaintiffs who successfully sued Hazleton are seeking at least $2.3 million in legal fees. The City of Hazleton in Pennsylvania currently operates on a yearly budget of $7.9 million and has spend more than $200,000 to defend the case. If Hazleton looses its appeal in the 3rd Circuit Court, it will then file an appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court, according to Hazleton Mayor Lou Barletta. Both the plaintiffs and Mayor Barletta who was re-elected have promised to continue to appeal the case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. The final outcome would most likely be decided within the next year, according to legal experts. Hazleton will most likely face bankruptcy fighting this case.

Pro-immigration activists have said the City of Hazleton officials should pay for their decision to approve a local immigration law that target immigrants, help create an environment of hate and hostility within the city, violate immigrant rights including civil rights, encourages profiling, and discriminates against Latinos.

Hazleton is facing a legal challenge by a coalition of national civil rights groups led by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF) of Chicago. Last April, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) also joined the coalition in filing a brief of Amici Curiae urging the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to hold an anti-immigrant ordinance enacted in Hazleton, PA, unconstitutional and discriminatory. Other members of the coalition include, the Public Interest Law Center, the Asian Legal Defense and Education Fund, Lawyer’s Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, Legal Momentum, Lambda Legal, National Immigration Law Center, Southern Law Center, Mayer Brown LLP of Chicago, Illinois, and others.

For your information:

http://www.adl.org/Civil_Rights/AB/Amici%20Brief%2007-3531.pdf