Wall Street Journal (August 30, 2005).
Lawyers for Saudi Prisoner Ask Court
to Throw Out Roberts Ruling.
By JESS
BRAVIN
![[John Roberts]](./Article.Hamdan%20Case%20--%20Roberts%20Recusal%20--%20Appeal%20(WSJ%208.30.05)_files/image001.gif)
WASHINGTON
-- Lawyers
for a Saudi prisoner asked the federal appeals court here to throw out a ruling
denying Geneva Conventions protection to Guantanamo Bay detainees because Judge
John Roberts voted on the case while privately pursuing a Supreme Court
nomination with the White House.
In
the July 15 ruling, a three-judge panel of the appeals court said that military
proceedings against detainees at the naval base in Cuba could proceed. Judge
Roberts, a 2003 Bush appointee to the appeals court, joined two other judges in
reversing a lower court. The next week President Bush announced his nomination
to succeed Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.
Since
Judge Roberts disclosed this month in a Senate questionnaire that he had been
interviewing for the Supreme Court vacancy while hearing the case, legal
ethicists have sparred over whether he should have disqualified himself or told
the parties of his private discussions.
It
is unclear how the move will affect the confirmation hearings for Judge Roberts
that are scheduled to begin next week. After meeting yesterday with Judge
Roberts, Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the Judiciary Committee's ranking
Democrat, said that he considered the recusal question "significant"
and that he had discussed it with the nominee. Mr. Leahy said two other
committee Democrats who have questioned Judge Roberts's participation in the
Guantanamo case, Russell Feingold of Wisconsin and Charles Schumer of New York,
were likely to "raise it at some length" at the hearings.
The
White House strongly backed its nominee. "There was no conflict of
interest in this unanimous appeals-court ruling," spokeswoman Dana Perino
said.
Lawyers
for one of those prisoners, Rami bin Saad al-Oteibi of Saudi Arabia, filed
their motion under seal on Friday. A court security officer cleared it for
public release yesterday. The motion seeks to intervene in the Hamdan case and
asks for a new hearing before a panel without Judge Roberts.
Separately,
a federal judge in New York ordered1 the Defense
Department to ask Guantanamo prisoners whether they object to their identities
being made public. Citing privacy grounds, the Pentagon had deleted their names
from detention-hearing transcripts provided to the Associated Press under the
Freedom of Information Act.
U.S.
District Judge Jed Rakoff noted that the government had made no national
security claim, and that he needed to know the detainees' views on whether they
wanted their privacy protected.