January 22, 2010 marked the passing of President Obama's self-declared deadline to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay. To take note of the missed deadline, the Constitution Project joined with the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and the Open Society Institute to cosponsor a panel discussion examining what prevented the administration from reaching its goal and what obstacles remain to closing the detention facility. Titled "One Year and Counting: When and How Will Guantanamo Close?," the program featured an array of voices, including current and former government and military officials, a sitting federal judge, a former federal prosecutor in New York City, advocates, and litigators. Video of the program is below.
 
 
In the aftermath of the attempted Christmas Day bombing, some want to shift the discussion from the best way to close Guantanamo - an objective first announced by President Bush - to instituting Guantanamo-like policies in the United States. Critics of the Obama administration's decision to try the alleged bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, in federal court have gone so far as to suggest that he be designated an "enemy combatant," transferred to military custody for interrogation, denied access to counsel and tried by a military commission even though he was captured in the United States. The policies employed at Guantanamo have resulted in protracted litigation and delayed justice, weakened our alliances, and undermined constitutional principles at home, and for these reasons such policies must not be transferred to the US. They must end.
 
In the aftermath of the foiled Christmas Day bombing, the media and several of my former colleagues in Congress have challenged the Obama administration’s decision to try Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab in federal court rather than by military commission. The administration’s decision, however, should be welcomed not criticized, as a clear affirmation of the strength and resiliency of our criminal justice system.
 
Critics of the Obama administration’s decision to try Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, arrested and charged as the Christmas Day bomber, and other terrorism suspects in federal court are trying again to employ failed Guantanamo policies.
 
Yes — the not-so-bright, would-be terrorist from Nigeria got though international and domestic security mechanisms supposed to have stopped him long before the jerk lit his underwear afire before landing in Detroit.  And yes — the incident happened during the administration of President Barack Obama.  But the sniping at the president by Republicans, including former Vice President Cheney, and by conservative radio and TV commentators, borders on — if not passing into — asinine.
 
Guilty.  I confess.  To those who saw me as--accused me of being--an unrepentant non-PC believer in American "exceptionalism", a (dare I use the word) "patriot", you were right all along.  I don't wear a flag pin on my lapel but that's only because I'm not big on adornment (I didn't even have my own campaign bumper sticker on my car); in my heart, though, I wave the flag.  And I do so because I (a) love this country, and (b) believe that it is different, better, "exceptional."
 
We applaud Attorney General Eric Holder's recent decision to try five 9/11 coconspirators in federal court in New York. However, by his decision to prosecute others by military commission, we are reminded that one of the central questions Americans must ask as we work to prevent terrorist acts and to punish those who commit, or seek to commit, them, is one posed by President Dwight D. Eisenhower: "How far can you go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without?"
 
Earlier today, in an effort coordinated by the Constitution Project, three signatories to Beyond Guantanamo: A Bipartisan Declaration sent an open letter to the Illinois congressional delegation and the state's public officials supporting the use of federal and state prisons, including the Thomson, Illinois facility, to house Guantanamo detainees pre-trial and post-conviction.
 
The federal government and its defenders continue to manufacture arguments, and to search for ways through which to avoid the obvious constitutional infirmities that have plagued the manner in which detainees at the US detention facility in Guantanamo have been dealt for eight years.
 
Yesterday, the Senate, while considering the Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2010, voted to reject an amendment by Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) that would prohibit the Justice Department from using federal funds to prosecute any alleged planners or conspirators in the September 11, 2001 attacks in the federal courts. Senators should be congratulated on taking the right course and recognizing that the federal courts are the right forum for trying these individuals.
 
A message on Beyond Guantanamo from Virginia Sloan, president and founder of the Constitution Project
 
 
 
Huffington Post blog post by Virginia Sloan: Beyond Guantanamo (11/04/2009)
Today, over 125 prominent Americans, including former members of Congress, diplomats, federal judges and prosecutors, high-level military and government officials, and bar leaders, endorsed Beyond Guantanamo: A Bipartisan Declaration. Coordinated by the Constitution Project and Human Rights First, the Declaration represents the largest collection of policy experts yet to lend their voices to a responsible -- and constitutional -- plan to process the cases of suspected terrorist detainees held at the Guantanamo detention facility.
 
 

 

 

 


 

Recent News

9/1/2010

Criminal Justice Program Associate

7/29/2010

Amicus brief filed in case involving right to counsel for indigent defendants

7/29/2010

A Who’s Who of American lawyers, policymakers and scholars condemn attacks on lawyers representing terrorism suspects

7/28/2010

Congress Votes to Narrow Gap in Cocaine Sentencing Rules

7/6/2010

JURIST: Prosecute Defendants, Not Their Counsel