Keeping It Away From Congress

The president is no longer seeking a new law for indefinite detention, and will continue to hold terrorist suspects without charge in accordance with the system established under Bush and Cheney. Ironically, Greenwald considers this an "important victory". Here's why:

A new preventive detention law would have permanently institutionalized that power, almost certainly applying not only to the "war on Terror" but all future conflicts.  It would have endowed preventive detention with the legitimizing force of explicit statutory authority, which it currently lacks.  It would have caused preventive detention to ascend to the cherished status of official bipartisan consensus -- and thus, for all practical purposes, been placed off limits from meaningful debate [...]

As bad as the Obama administration is on detention issues, the Congress is far worse.  Any time the words "Terrorism" or "Al Qaeda" are uttered, they leap to the most extreme and authoritarian measures.  Congress is intended to be a check on presidential powers, but each time Terrorism is the issue, the ironic opposite occurs:  when the Obama administration and Congress are at odds, it is Congress demanding greater powers of executive detention (as happened when Congress blocked Obama from transferring Guantanamo detainees to the U.S.).

The hope is that the courts will keep those powers in check.

2006-2011 archives for The Daily Dish, featuring Andrew Sullivan