What’s a royalist to do?

by

Taking a break from all the bad news generated by the mistakes the Obama administration is making, one thing he did right was issue an executive order halting proceedings against Gitmo detainees in the alternative trial system set up by the Bush administration, until Obama’s justice department, etc., can examine the issues and decide how it wants to process these cases.  (Move them to federal courts, the normal military justice system, come up with something else, etc.)

One of Bush’s judges, however, refused to comply with that order.  He said his court was legally constituted, and he saw no reason to stop his trial.

I was just wondering: how is a unitary executive subscriber supposed to feel about that?  You know, the John Yoos, David Addingtons, Alberto Gonzaleses, Dick Cheneys, George Bushes, & c.

I mean, it’s quite the dilemma.  On the one hand, you’ve got a judge appointed by the executive to the executive’s own little in-house judicial system disobeying a direct order from the new executive.

As Cheney has made clear, if everything he and Bush put in place isn’t continued exactly as-is by the Obama administration, we are all going to die.  On the other hand, as Cheney has made clear, the president is king.  There are no limits on his/her authority, especially during War Time ™.  So, if you’re  a rump Bush royalist, are you happy this judge stuck his thumb in Obama’s eye and said he was gonna keep doing what Bush and Cheney set up (thus preventing terrorists from eating America’s babies), or are you upset that this mere courtier has disobeyed the king?

Should this judge be elevated to the Supreme Court, or thrown in the dungeon?

There are no other options (except maybe beheading).  It’s got to be one or the other.  I wonder which one.

Advertisements

3 Responses to “What’s a royalist to do?”

  1. Terry A. Says:

    Does he float?

  2. urbino Says:

    That’s classified.

  3. michaellasley Says:

    I realize I haven’t the slightest about anything law related. But this seems a silly thing for the judge to grandstand about. The case at issue is one stemming from before Sept. 11th, no? I mean, the case is almost 10 years old, and the judge doesn’t want to wait a couple extra months?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: