Rumsfeld accused of approving torture


The ACLU (which you should have already joined) and HRF have brought suit against Donald Rumsfeld, alleging that the Secretary of Defense is directly and actively responsible for the mistreatment of POWs/"enemy combatants" in Iraq.

From Reuters:
Two U.S. human rights groups on Tuesday sued Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, saying he first authorized and then failed to stop torture of prisoners in Iraq (news - web sites) and Afghanistan (news - web sites).

The American Civil Liberties Union (news - web sites) and Human Rights First filed suit in federal district court in Rumsfeld's home state of Illinois on behalf of eight former detainees who said they were severely tortured. All eight were subsequently released without being charged.


If nothing else, this suit will allow the reams of Freedom of Information Act documents unearthed by both organizations to see the light of day in the context of what will hopefully be a very public set of hearings.

One thing I can't tell you (since I lack knowledge of basic principles of jurisprudence) is what the upshot of a verdict would be while Rumsfeld is sitting as Secretary of Defense, especially the request that the Rumsfeld's actions be found unconstitutional. I know that Cabinet members have to take an oath in which they swear to uphold the Constitution (Article VI.3), so what happens if he is found to have specifically violated that oath? For that matter, what happens if such a verdict is passed even after he leaves office? Is there a Constitutional lawyer in this hizzouse? If so, weigh in, by all means.

Posted: Tue - March 1, 2005 at 12:42 PM   | Category:     |   |   | |


©
eXTReMe Tracker