Shakeel Syed, executive director, Islamic Shura Council of Southern California, sees it this way: "It looks to us as if the government is making examples of people who speak out or are prominent in the community. Otherwise, this was a simple immigration violation case."

Assuming Mr. Hamdan did overstay his 27-year-old visa, he had not been in trouble with the law (before this), according to one of his attorneys, and there was an amnesty in 1986. The attorney believes it unlikely the government will be successful in deporting him to Jordan.

An Orange County Register editorial expresses the outrage we should all feel:

If the government was going to make a claim about national security, it should at the very least have filed charges that backed up the accusation. Keeping people in prison because somebody in government says they're a national security threat is the way of tyrannies, not of constitutional republics governed by the rule of law. The fact that the judiciary finally recognized this injustice is encouraging, but the fact that Mr. Hamdan could be imprisoned for two years on such frivolous grounds suggests that American traditions of fair play and due process are shakier than we might have hoped.