A late night bombshell of sorts from the Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
"President Obama's advisers are nearing a recommendation that Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the self-proclaimed mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, be prosecuted in a military tribunal, administration officials said, a step that would reverse Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr.'s plan to try him in civilian court in New York City.
The president's advisers feel increasingly hemmed in by bipartisan opposition to a federal trial in New York and demands, mainly from Republicans, that Mohammed and his accused co-conspirators remain under military jurisdiction, officials said. While Obama has favored trying some terrorism suspects in civilian courts as a symbol of U.S. commitment to the rule of law, critics have said military tribunals are the appropriate venue for those accused of attacking the United States.
If Obama accepts the likely recommendation of his advisers, the White House may be able to secure from Congress the funding and legal authority it needs to close the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and replace it with a facility within the United States. The administration has failed to meet a self-imposed one-year deadline to close Guantanamo..."
"Anger from the left
A decision to reverse course on Mohammed is likely to dismay civil liberties groups and human rights groups who loudly cheered Obama's election because they thought he would dismantle military tribunals developed during the Bush administration.
"If President Obama reverses Holder's decision to try the 9/11 defendants in criminal court and retreats to using the Bush military commissions, he deals a death blow to his own Justice Department, breaks a clear campaign promise to restore the rule of law and demonstrates that the promises to his constituents are all up for grabs," said Anthony Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union. "The military commissions have not worked, they are doomed to failure, and Obama will invariably find himself running for office again while not achieving justice for the 9/11 attacks."
The latter two paragraphs pretty much sum up my personal feelings on this.
UPDATE: A couple of last, very late night points after reflection on this:
First, it should be stressed that this is simply a report on a recommendation, not a final decision. Ultimately, this is the President's call and that choice has not been made. My own suspicion is that this is a trial balloon to see if it floats. If you don't like it, now's the time to make your displeasure known. Call the White House at (202) 456-1414.
Second, all of the talk about the practicalities of holding a trial in NYC is a smokescreen in my view from the real issue at hand, which is civilian versus military trials. While I'm not an expert in Federal Criminal Procedure, it seems to me that any possible objection to an Article III trial on security grounds could be met somehow -- even by going to the length of holding the trial at Guantanamo and flying in jurors, attorneys and court personnel if need be. If the Administration does ulrimately go along with this, it's a real concession of an important principle to the Cheney wing of the GOP -- and one on which the President campaigned.