Other Columns by Horace Cooper
Horace Cooper Bio

Printer-Friendly Version

Page 2 of 2

Arguably, like President Truman had in his day, President Bush sees the War on Terror as the defining issue of his presidency. And as White House Counsel, Harriet Miers has been a key architect of the administration's policy to combat terrorist networks. Unlike the high profile advocacy role of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales which may have presented some significant recusal concerns were he to be named to the Supreme Court, Ms. Miers' lower profile role as White House counsel is less likely to do so.

In any event the Court ultimately will have to deal with the follow-up of its rulings in: Hamdi v. Rumsfeld and Rasul v. Bush. While Hamdi upheld the authority of the executive to detain American citizens designated enemy combatants the decision was narrow in its scope pushing unanswered questions for review later. Rasul however is more problematic. In this case, the Supreme Court extended federal court access to "alien" enemy combatants even in cases involving detainees captured and held oversees outside of the United States.

In the cases likely to follow these two decisions, the Supreme Court's final direction is yet to be defined. Today the court signals a mixed level of deference to the executive's prosecution of the War on Terror. If Harriet Miers joins Chief Justice Roberts in tilting the court towards giving the Bush Administration broader latitude when it comes to national security, history will have clearly repeated itself.

-----------

Assistant Professor Horace Cooper teaches a course on the "Modern Supreme Court Confirmation Process" at George Mason University School of Law

--------------------

Note -- The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, and/or philosophy of GOPUSA.

>> Back -- Page 1 2