This is a Cato special podcast. I'm Caleb Brown. The Supreme Court has ruled that those

being held in Guantanamo Bay can in fact challenge their status, thus giving them access to American courts.

Tim Lynch, the director of the Cato Institute's project on criminal justice, comments.

The issue was whether or not the prisoners being held down in Guantanamo can get a hearing before an impartial federal judge.

The Bush administration has been relentless in trying to keep, set up

these prison camps, take prisoners in the war on terror, but then cut the

judiciary out of the picture. They do not want federal judges to be hearing claims by

prisoners that are saying, you know, mistakes were made in our cases and the

prisoners through the writ of habeas corpus have been saying we need to have our

day in court to argue that a mistake has been made in our case.

So the issue is whether or not the courts can hear these types of claims.

How relevant is the issue of citizenship?

Citizenship is a big factor for many of the justices.

For the conservatives on the court such as Justice Scalia, he says if you're an American

citizen, the Bush administration cannot deny you the writ of habeas corpus.

So you will get into court even if the president labels

you an enemy combatant.

But he draws this sharp distinction

between citizens and non-citizens.

So for the non-citizens that were at issue in the case this week down in Guantanamo,

he was saying that the writ of habeas corpus does not apply to them.

I think he's incorrect about that.

...