Court denies Padilla appeal

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court on Monday let stand a lower court decision that said the president could order a U.S. citizen arrested in this country for suspected ties to terrorism to be held indefinitely without being charged or facing trial.

In a victory for the Bush administration, the justices voted 6-3 to spurn an appeal by Jose Padilla, a former Chicago gang member with alleged ties to al-Qaida who was held in a military brig as an “enemy combatant” for nearly 31/2 years. The administration, trying to avoid a ruling that might have undermined President Bush’s power to detain terrorism suspects, had discouraged the high court from considering Padilla’s appeal.

Padilla was picked up at Chicago’s O’Hare airport in May 2002. He was accused of fighting for al-Qaida in Afghanistan and of plotting with the terrorist network to bomb U.S. targets. He was in military custody until November 2005, when the administration suddenly brought criminal charges against him and transferred his case to federal court in Miami. The switch came as the administration faced a deadline for filing arguments to the Supreme Court in Padilla’s challenge of the president’s power to detain U.S. citizens and hold them without charges or trial. After charging Padilla, the administration argued that his claim to the high court was moot.

The justices apparently agreed. Their action was not a ruling on the merits of Padilla’s appeal, and the court’s refusal to review the lower court decision set no national precedent. Three justices – Anthony Kennedy, Chief Justice John Roberts and John Paul Stevens – hinted at the court’s reasoning. “Padilla is scheduled to be tried on criminal charges,” Kennedy wrote. “Any consideration of what rights he might be able to assert if he were returned to military custody would be hypothetical.”

However, Kennedy warned that if the government changed the status of Padilla’s custody, he would have grounds to challenge his confinement in federal court. He said if that happens, judges should act quickly to ensure his rights are not violated.

Justices David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer dissented from the order rejecting Padilla’s appeal, but only Ginsburg made her reasons public.

“Although the government has recently lodged charges against Padilla in a civilian court, nothing prevents the executive from returning to the road it earlier constructed and defended,” she wrote.

Donna Newman, Padilla’s lawyer, said the government should not be able to simply change his status after three years without challenge.

“Nobody denies that this could happen to him again,” she said.