Specter, Leahy Introduce Bill to “Restore” Habeas Corpus
In another sign of shifting ground in the post-election Congress, Senators Arlen Specter and Patrick Leahy yesterday introduced the “Habeas Corpus Restoration Act of 2006,” which would reinstate federal court jurisdiction over Guantanamo detainees and other suspected enemy combatants.
The bill would repeal two provisions of the Military Commissions Act of 2006 enacted in September that limit habeas corpus. “Habeas corpus” refers to the ability of a detainee to seek judicial review of his case.
“The Constitution of the United States is explicit that habeas corpus may be suspended only in time of rebellion or invasion,” observed Sen. Specter. “We are suffering neither of those alternatives at the present time. We have not been invaded, and there has not been a rebellion.”
“This bill would restore the great writ of habeas corpus, a cornerstone of American liberty for hundreds of years that Congress and the President rolled back in an unprecedented and unnecessary way with September’s Military Commissions Act,” said Senator Leahy.
See the introduction of the Habeas Corpus Restoration Act here.
While it seems that the current political climate may not incentivize the use of evidence-based data sources for decision making, those of us who are passionate about ensuring results for the American people will continue to firmly stand on the belief that learning agendas are a crucial component to successfully navigate a changing future.
In recent months, we’ve seen much of these decades’ worth of progress erased. Contracts for evaluations of government programs were canceled, FFRDCs have been forced to lay off staff, and federal advisory committees have been disbanded.
This report outlines a framework relying on “Cooperative Technical Means” for effective arms control verification based on remote sensing, avoiding on-site inspections but maintaining a level of transparency that allows for immediate detection of changes in nuclear posture or a significant build-up above agreed limits.
At a recent workshop, we explored the nature of trust in specific government functions, the risk and implications of breaking trust in those systems, and how we’d known we were getting close to specific trust breaking points.