Room for Debate
November 19, 2010
Ahmed Ghailani was convicted on Wednesday in federal court on one count of conspiracy related to the 1998 embassy bombings in Africa. The jury acquitted him on more than 280 other charges, including every count of murder. He will face 20 years to life in prison for that one charge.
The mixed verdict has re-ignited the debate over the Obama administration’s effort to handle terrorism prosecutions in the criminal justice system. Critics said the verdict proved that civilian courts could not be trusted to handle the prosecution of Al Qaeda terrorists.
What does the Ghailani case and verdict tell us about whether federal court is an appropriate forum for trying Guantánamo detainees?
"A Fair Trial, Without Torture's Taint"
David Cole, Georgetown University Law Center
"What This Means for Other Cases"
Robert Chesney, University of Texas School of Law
"Justice Was Not Done"
Andrew C. McCarthy, National Review
"A Proper Conviction"
Diane Marie Amann, U.C. Davis School of Law
"Create a Hybrid Court"
Glenn M. Sulmasy, law professor, U.S. Coast Guard Academy
"Be Cautious About Drawing Lessons"
Orin Kerr, George Washington Law School
More
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.