home

Suit Against Rumsfeld Dismissed

A lawsuit filed by nine former military prisoners against Donald Rumsfeld and military officers has been dismissed on the ground that they are immune from suit when they make decisions about the treatment of prisoners. Here's what the prisoners alleged:

The lawsuit contends the prisoners were beaten, suspended upside down from the ceiling by chains, urinated on, shocked, sexually humiliated, burned, locked inside boxes and subjected to mock executions.

Lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union and Human Rights First had argued that Rumsfeld and top military officials disregarded warnings about the abuse and authorized the use of illegal interrogation tactics that violated the constitutional and human rights of prisoners.

Calling the case "lamentable," Judge Thomas Hogan ruled that "authorizing monetary damages remedies against military officials engaged in an active war would invite enemies to use our own federal courts to obstruct the Armed Forces' ability to act decisively and without hesitation." Obstructing the government's illegal behavior isn't such a bad thing, is it? Holding Rumsfeld accountable wouldn't be such a bad thing, either.

< Iraq Supplemental: Senate Votes Down Attempt To Strip Nonbinding Timeline. Now What? | Iraq Supplemental: Does It Matter If The Withdrawal Timeline is Nonbinding? >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Has anyone seen the opinion? (none / 0) (#1)
    by MPhilip on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 04:21:39 PM EST
    It will be intersting to see how Judge Hogan disposed of the asserted application of the Alien Tort Statute.

    If anyone reading here comes accross the link to the opinion, kindly post it. Thanks.

    Monetary award? (none / 0) (#2)
    by Jen M on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 06:37:51 PM EST
    I guess only the enlisted to prison time

    So now Osama bin Laden determines (none / 0) (#3)
    by Al on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 07:04:34 PM EST
    the course of justice:
    Allowing the case to go forward, Hogan said in December, might subject government officials to all sorts of political lawsuits. Even Osama bin Laden could sue, Hogan said, claiming two American presidents threatened to have him murdered.

    IANAL, but isn't a judge supposed to deal with the case at hand? What does Osama bin Laden have to do with anything? And why should he be a determining factor in a judicial ruling?

    Surely it's not the place of the judge to prevent possible future lawsuits?

    Al (none / 0) (#6)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 08:18:08 AM EST
    What does Osama bin Laden have to do with anything?

    I think you would call it an "illustrative point."

    Parent

    I don't think (none / 0) (#8)
    by Al on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 11:52:58 AM EST
    it's a judge's job to make "illustrative points".

    Parent
    Rumsfeld better not go to Germany (none / 0) (#4)
    by janinsanfran on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 09:42:26 PM EST
    There's a war crimes lawsuit cooking there which is embarrassing the German government. Seems they felt some historic need for some serious legislation enabling the prosecution of grevious war crimes -- with no statute of limitations -- and now face the problem of how to get rid of charges against U.S. leaders.

    i find the judge's logic illusive, at best (none / 0) (#5)
    by cpinva on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 01:15:30 AM EST
    soldiers get court martialed all the time, during active warfare. the justice system doesn't grind to a halt, just because a war is on. people get tried for war crimes, while active hostilities continue.

    what makes rumsfeld and these particular officers special?

    Difference (none / 0) (#7)
    by Gabriel Malor on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 09:32:50 AM EST
    For starters (and this is just off the top of my head -- I am anxiously awaiting the opinion in this case), Rumsfeld is not a soldier. Nor is the civil court system equivalent to courts martial. As it appears the judge pointed out, allowing the imposition of injunctions and monetary damages during the prosecution of a war is, well, insane. Such remedies are not to be found in the courts martial system. That's your main difference.

    Also, Jeralyn snarks in response to the argument that our enemies could use the civil court system to bring the war to a halt:

    Obstructing the government's illegal behavior isn't such a bad thing, is it?

    She is right, but she ignores the fact that there is nothing to stop our enemies from obstructing legal government behavior, too.

    Parent

    So let's see if I understand (none / 0) (#9)
    by Al on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 12:02:50 PM EST
    Rumsfeld is immune from prosecution because he's the former Secretary of Defense, and consequently in charge of the military; but he's immune from a court-martial because he's not a military officer.

    I don't buy it. In a democracy, people are accountable for their decisions. If Rumsfeld cannot be held to account for the consequences of his orders, then that's not a democracy. Period.

    Parent

    No, you don't understand. (none / 0) (#10)
    by Gabriel Malor on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 12:47:57 PM EST
    Please try and read more carefully. I summarized what I believe is the judges point (again, without having read the actual opinion):

    ...allowing the imposition of injunctions and monetary damages during the prosecution of a war is, well, insane.

    Do you see now why Rumsfeld is not "immune" from anything, or shall I spell it out for you? Maybe I'll simply adjust the emphasis in that sentence.

    Allowing the imposition of injunctions and monetary damages during the prosecution of a war is, well, insane.

    Parent

    Order. (none / 0) (#11)
    by Gabriel Malor on Fri Mar 30, 2007 at 03:13:48 PM EST
    For those of you who were asking for it, the ACLU has helpfully posted the judge's order in this case. It can be found here (PDF).

    I haven't had a chance to read it yet (it's 58 pages long), and am heading to the beach now. As this is not my kind of beach reading, I leave it up to you guys.