An Opinion on Terrorists and the Judicial System by the New Nominee For Attorney General

Last month, the nominee for Attorney General, Michael Mukasey, wrote an Op-Ed piece in the Wall Street Journal about the trial of Jose Padilla. He writes:

"It may be claimed that Padilla's odyssey is a triumph for due process and the rule of law in wartime. Instead, when it is examined closely, this case shows why current institutions and statutes are not well suited to even the limited task of supplementing what became, after Sept. 11, 2001, principally a military effort to combat Islamic terrorism."

He goes on to urge the Congress and the American public to carefully consider the option of creating a new adjudicary framework to deal with terror suspects and enemy combatants. I can't imagine that the judiciary will be willing to just roll over and let this happen. Even if they did, who would be in charge of setting up this new framework? Who would be subject to the system that would result? How do we prevent it from becoming a bottomless hole where 'dangerous' people are refused due process and simply dissappear?

Mukasey's piece can be found here.