Mark Levine (author of the best-selling Men In Black, president of Landmark Legal Foundation) has this to say about the current case about the holding of unlawful combatants going to SCOTUS and John McCain's SA 1977 on torture:
snip.....In 1950, in Johnson v. Eisentrager, the Supreme Court held it did not have the authority to take up a challenge by 21 German nationals held in China, who were tried and convicted by U.S. military tribunals. In 2004, in Rasul v. Bush, the Court reversed course and held that U.S. civilian courts would be open to foreign enemy combatants held overseas.Regarding McCain:
snip....The judiciary's increasing involvement in an area where it has historically understood the limitations of its competence and reach is extremely troublesome.
Third, while it is true that the judiciary no longer seems willing to exercise restraint in these cases, codification typically leads to more litigation which leads to more judicial intervention. (I should note that McCain has actually argued that these detainees should be brought to the U.S. and tried in U.S. civilian courts, which would be disastrous for many reasons, including recruitment in our prisons, the further conference of due-process rights on the enemy, and the criminalization of the war on terrorism — where detainees’ rights are emphasized over detention, interrogation, and national security.)
Mark R. Levin on War on Terror on National Review Online
The bolding is mine. Can anyone explain to me how McCain's mind works? I don't GET him at all.