Return to Transcripts main page

Live From...

Supreme Court to Hear from Gitmo Detainees

Aired November 10, 2003 - 13:03   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


MILES O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: They don't face charges, they don't have lawyers and they've never seen a judge. Today, though, the so- called enemy combatants locked up at Camp Delta on Guantanamo Bay have the next best thing to due process: a hearing on the docket in the supreme court of the United States.
CNN's Bob Franken joining us with the high court's first intervention in the war on terror.

Hello, Bob.

BOB FRANKEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hello, Miles.

And as important as that is, the hearing by judges, a justice's order, is limited. The arguments will be limited to whether U.S. courts have jurisdiction over the specific detainees that are being held at Guantanamo Bay. And although there say long-running legal dispute about how much latitude the administration has, the executive branch of government has in conducting this war on terror. This is a small section of it. The issue is whether U.S. courts have jurisdiction over a U.S. base that is located in another country, specifically Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, which is on the sovereign territory of Cuba. It is not part of the United States. The lower courts ruled that as a result, the U.S. courts don't have standing. There are two lawsuits here that have combined into one. One involves 12 Kuwaiti who are being held at Guantanamo Bay. The other one, four people who live in British Commonwealth countries, Specifically the United Kingdom and Australia.

The Supreme Court, these four justices, that's all that's needed to grant the right to a hearing have, have decided they want to clarify this issue.

As a matter of fact, it is highly unusual in the fact that there is no confusion in the lower court, no compelling reason for them to hear it, but, of course, this is the Supreme Court, Miles. They have the right to decide that they want to offer clarification.

We would expect the hearing sometime later in the year, a ruling by the end of the year, to point out four justices, what would require a hearing to go forward. Of course five justices would be needed to come up with a discussion. I would point out also, to quote the justices, this is limited to the following question: "whether the United States courts lack jurisdiction to consider challenges to the legality of the detention of foreign nationals captured abroad in connection with hostilities and incarcerated at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, Cuba." That the exact wording. I would also point out that there are other cases moving up through the court system which address the fundamental questions, of how much latitude the president has in conducting the war. This is a precise ruling about jurisdiction of U.S. court -- Miles.

O'BRIEN: Bob, to what extent do the military tribunals and the military legal system get involved in this one way or another?

FRANKEN: Well, the military tribunals, if they would be held, would probably be held at Guantanamo Bay. Now there is separate precedent to hold military tribunals, and of course, there are arguments being raised about that. So there, of course, are peripheral. They, of course, overlap, but, but, the question in this particular case is specifically about the role of U.S. civil courts in a sovereign country.

O'BRIEN: CNN's Bob Franken in Washington. Thanks much.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com






Aired November 10, 2003 - 13:03   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
MILES O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: They don't face charges, they don't have lawyers and they've never seen a judge. Today, though, the so- called enemy combatants locked up at Camp Delta on Guantanamo Bay have the next best thing to due process: a hearing on the docket in the supreme court of the United States.
CNN's Bob Franken joining us with the high court's first intervention in the war on terror.

Hello, Bob.

BOB FRANKEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hello, Miles.

And as important as that is, the hearing by judges, a justice's order, is limited. The arguments will be limited to whether U.S. courts have jurisdiction over the specific detainees that are being held at Guantanamo Bay. And although there say long-running legal dispute about how much latitude the administration has, the executive branch of government has in conducting this war on terror. This is a small section of it. The issue is whether U.S. courts have jurisdiction over a U.S. base that is located in another country, specifically Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, which is on the sovereign territory of Cuba. It is not part of the United States. The lower courts ruled that as a result, the U.S. courts don't have standing. There are two lawsuits here that have combined into one. One involves 12 Kuwaiti who are being held at Guantanamo Bay. The other one, four people who live in British Commonwealth countries, Specifically the United Kingdom and Australia.

The Supreme Court, these four justices, that's all that's needed to grant the right to a hearing have, have decided they want to clarify this issue.

As a matter of fact, it is highly unusual in the fact that there is no confusion in the lower court, no compelling reason for them to hear it, but, of course, this is the Supreme Court, Miles. They have the right to decide that they want to offer clarification.

We would expect the hearing sometime later in the year, a ruling by the end of the year, to point out four justices, what would require a hearing to go forward. Of course five justices would be needed to come up with a discussion. I would point out also, to quote the justices, this is limited to the following question: "whether the United States courts lack jurisdiction to consider challenges to the legality of the detention of foreign nationals captured abroad in connection with hostilities and incarcerated at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, Cuba." That the exact wording. I would also point out that there are other cases moving up through the court system which address the fundamental questions, of how much latitude the president has in conducting the war. This is a precise ruling about jurisdiction of U.S. court -- Miles.

O'BRIEN: Bob, to what extent do the military tribunals and the military legal system get involved in this one way or another?

FRANKEN: Well, the military tribunals, if they would be held, would probably be held at Guantanamo Bay. Now there is separate precedent to hold military tribunals, and of course, there are arguments being raised about that. So there, of course, are peripheral. They, of course, overlap, but, but, the question in this particular case is specifically about the role of U.S. civil courts in a sovereign country.

O'BRIEN: CNN's Bob Franken in Washington. Thanks much.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com