Retired Generals Want Scalia Off Gitmo Case

WASHINGTON - Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia was asked Monday to stay out
of a case involving a foreign detainee because of remarks Scalia made about the
rights of enemy combatants.

Speaking at the University of Freiberg in Switzerland on March 8, Scalia said
foreigners waging war against the United States have no rights under the
Constitution.

Justices were hearing arguments Tuesday in the case of Salim Ahmed Hamdan, a
former driver for Osama bin Laden. His lawyers argue that President Bush
overstepped his authority when he ordered Hamdan and other alleged enemy
combatants to face special military trials.

Hamdan's lawyers have not called for Scalia to step aside. Instead, five retired
generals who support Hamdan's arguments sent a letter late Monday to the court
with the request that Scalia withdraw from participating in the case. They say
Scalia appears to have prejudged the case.

The retired generals said Scalia's speech in Switzerland "give rise to the
unfortunate appearance that ... the justice had made up his mind about the
merits" of Hamdan's arguments.

In the speech, first reported by Newsweek, Scalia repeated his views from 2004
that enemy combatants held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, should not have access to
U.S. courts and traditional legal rights.

The retired generals said that the justice may have "personal animus" to the
Hamdan case because he has a son who served in the military in Iraq.

Justices decide for themselves whether they have conflicts and should stay out
of cases.

Two years ago, the Supreme Court ruled that the detainees could use U.S. courts
to challenge their detention. Scalia disagreed with that ruling, and in the
recent speech repeated his beliefs that enemy combatants have no legal rights.

The Hamdan case will go forward without Chief Justice John Roberts, who had
voted in the case as a lower court judge.

The letter came from five retired generals and admirals: Navy Rear Adm. Donald
J. Guter; Navy Rear Adm. John D. Hutson; Vice Adm. Lee F. Gunn; Marine
Brig. Gen. David M. Brahms; and Army Brig. Gen. James P. Cullen.

------------------------------------------------------------

Supreme Court judge says civil rights for Guantanamo inmates 'crazy'

WASHINGTON (AFP) - A US Supreme Court judge has said it would be "crazy" to give
war on terror detainees rights in civil courts, and has castigated Europeans for
criticising the Guantanamo detention camp, media reports said.

The comments attributed to Justice Antonin Scalia were published a day before
the Supreme Court starts hearing a key challenge to special military tribunals
for "war on terror" suspects at the US naval base in Cuba.

"War is war, and it has never been the case that when you captured a combatant
you have to give them a jury trial in your civil courts," Scalia said during a
talk on March 8 at the University of Freiburg in Switzerland, Newsweek magazine
reported.

"Foreigners, in foreign countries, have no rights under the American
Constitution," Scalia said, according to the www.scotusblog legal website,
adding that "nobody has ever thought otherwise."

"If he was captured by my army on a battlefield, that is where he belongs,"
Scalia told the audience.

"I had a son on that battlefield and they were shooting at my son, and I'm not
about to give this man who was captured in a war a full jury trial. I mean it's
crazy."

The conservative judge's son, Matthew, fought in the Iraq war.

Scalia also said he was "astounded" at the "hypocritical" reaction to the
Guantanamo camp in Europe.

Some legal experts said the comments could be a reason for Scalia to withdraw
from hearing the case of Salim Ahmed Hamdan --- Osama Bin Laden's former driver
-- in which he is arguing that the US administration does not have the
constitutional right to order special military trials.

The case may also examine the extent to which the Geneva Conventions protect
Guantanamo detainees.

Supreme Court chief justice John Roberts has already withdrawn from the hearing
because he ruled on the Hamdan case while serving as an appeal court judge.