From The Wall Street Journal:Recent decisions have altered the way we're fighting in Afghanistan.
Earlier this year, a Washington D.C.-based federal court extended the constitutional right to habeas corpus to three foreign nationals detained by U.S. forces in Afghanistan. The case, Maqaleh v. Gates, represents yet another step in the federal judiciary's transformation from Alexander Hamilton's "least dangerous branch" into a fully active policy maker.
Historically, the constitutional right to habeas corpus -- an ancient process permitting prisoners to challenge the legality of their confinement -- was available only to individuals present in the U.S., or to American citizens held by federal authorities overseas. In a leading World War II case, Johnson v. Eisentrager (1950), the high court decided, with "bright line rules," that habeas corpus is unavailable to foreign citizens held outside the U.S.
Read more ....
My Comment: This is the logical extension of what happens when Judges are appointed who believe that the bench is an excellent arena to legislate and influence policy.
We have no one to blame but ourselves and those who elect politicians that share this judicial activism point of view.