Why should US judges judge over the prisoners at Gitmo?

Question

Could anyone please tell me why the US has the right to judge these "enemies"? They were caught somewhere not in the US and the maximum IMO logical would be to be tried by the allied forces (not the US alone again) on the soil where they were captured or are citizens at).
So could anyone please tell me why exactly the US should judge over them?!
Please only pro-US judging answers since I want to know something I don't already do.
FYI: I make no distinctions between US-Military judges and US-court-system judges in this question!

Anonym · Accepted Answer

Because they're under US custody.

In American law enforcement, if you do something to someone while they're in your custody, you have 100% accountability for whatever happens to them, good or bad. That means prison guards, judges, attorneys, and anyone else who gets into contact with them. It's because of this responsibility, for both American citizens and foreign nationals, that the American legal system is a world-class example.

Infernal Disaster · Answer

The moment the prisoners were detained on US soil, they fell under the Federal Courts jurisdiction.

The Bill of Rights is a list of things the federal government may not do to an individual detained in the US and nowhere does it make an exception for non-citizens who are detained on US soil.

You may not see a difference between military judges and US Supreme Court judges; but it is the US Supreme Court judges who interpret the Constitution (the supreme law of the land).

Randall E · Answer

They should have been treated as POWs from the beginning, and the Bush Administration should have applied the Geneva Convention.    See, their own countries don't want them back so that could have enabled us to hold them indefinitely.

You need to understand, these were Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters - these aren't just random Muslims picked up off the street.

Why should US judges judge over the prisoners at Gitmo?

3 Antworten