On the recordMay 25, 2011
Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. The gentleman from Virginia is right, it would be easier to try them under military commissions. In fact, it would be easier not to try them at all. It would be easier just to hold them forever. Why bother with the trials. Why bother with the trials: because in over 200 years of history in this country, we do have a fair justice system and that does matter. Military generals will tell you that Guantanamo Bay has been a major, major problem for them in the field, a major recruiting tool for our enemies because it undermines our values. Having a justice system that we can depend on matters. I trust everyone on that side would agree on that, that it is not just a matter of what is easiest to hold them. If that was the case, we wouldn't have courts at all; we wouldn't have military tribunals; we wouldn't have anything. We would just hold them. So it does matter. I will also point out that, yes, the gentleman was acquitted of a whole bunch of charges. He was also convicted and sentenced to life in our Article III courts. So the system worked in that case. We have over 200 years of history with our Article III courts; and they have worked. By the way, the Constitution, as ruled by the court, applies in Guantanamo Bay. Habeas corpus was attached. It does apply there. They don't suddenly get constitutional rights coming here that they didn't have before.…





