Letter to Justice Anthony Kennedy

From my friend Karl Peterjohn.

16 June 2008

Mr. Anthony Kennedy
US Supreme Court
1 First St., NE
Washington, DC 20543

Dear Sir:

I am writing concerning your most recent decision empowering terrorists captured on the battlefield in the U.S. court system. This edict granting habeas corpus rights to Islamic Jihadists will stain you and your four left wing activist colleagues as much as the bloodstained clothes worn by Danny Pearl were spoiled when he was decapitated and butchered for being an American.

Justice Jackson said the U.S. Constitution was not a suicide pact. I never would believe that this day would come, but you have now proven him wrong. This kennedy constitution you have created with your recent edict is indeed a suicide pact and a taxpayer funded perpetual litigation device aiding killers.

The next time that terrorists succeed in killing a large number, or even a few American citizens, their blood will be on your hands and the hands of your fellow black robed legislative (Breyer, Ginsburg, Souter, & Stephens) prevaricators. There are too many Americans have already been killed by the terrorists who were granted releases from the Guantanamo Bay prison. I believe this happened in part due to your earlier terrorist edicts issued by your narrow five vote majority.

Let me be blunt: If Al Qaeda or some other terrorist organization that you and your judicial colleagues provide aid and comfort to succeeds in taking over an aircraft or detonating some kind of explosive I hope that you and your four colleagues will bear the brunt of this next atrocity instead of myself, my family, members of the armed services, and average Americans who have borne this hideous burden imposed by Islamic Jihadist terrorists since the late 1970s but who felt the full force when thousands of us died September 11, 2001. Now you want to empower these prisoners to be able to perform a legal tap dance on their graves.

Your injustice to history that is contained within your latest edict must be exposed. This is the second time I have done so in pointing out the gross flaws contained within another narrow five judge majority on the U.S. Supreme Court. I was pleased to receive a response from one of your colleagues whose generous letter is proudly displayed on the wall of my office in your term limits case in 1995.

Over a decade ago, in your term limits case, I pointed out to you and your colleagues this interesting historical facts involving the first woman elected to the U.S. Congress: Jeanette Rankin of Montana. Rankin is a fascinating historical figure for several reasons but the most significant for this letter is the fact that she was the first woman elected to Congress in 1916, roughly four years before the constitutional amendment providing votes for women was enacted. How? Well, that U.S. Constitution allowed the states to determine the qualification for office as well as for voting and her state had a long history of allowing women votes, even as early as the second decade of the 20th century.

The left wing activist five vote majority determined that the state’s had some how lost this power to determine the qualifications for office and the result of this decision terminated the term limit movement at the federal level. At that time, historical precedent was overridden. Now it is both historical and judicial precedent is tossed out with your judicial rubbish. In this case you and your four black robed legislators have destroyed the 1950 precedent from the Eisentrager Case.

What’s a little precedent when you can have the N.Y. Times write an editorial fawning over your legal tripe.

Here are three key historical facts that you have ignored in your latest edict.

1) George Washington summarily had the British spy, Major John Andre, tried and hung in the unsuccessful scheme by Benedict Arnold to turn over West Point to the British Army during the Revolutionary War.

2) FDR had a quick trial held for German saboteurs who were dropped off by submarine in 1942 and quickly captured by the FBI. Most of them were quickly executed.

3) Then General Eisenhower had German soldiers who were captured wearing U.S. army clothing during the Battle of the Bulge in 1944 tried. These Germans convicted of being illegal combatants were executed in early 1945.

What did these folks have in common? No habeas corpus for any of them. There were quick but fair trials as “illegal combatants,” in a military or special court with a prompt execution of the sentence.

Now I believe that the Bush Administration has not done a good job in handling the terrorist prisoners being held at Guantanamo Bay Prison (see my third paragraph of this letter since the court has a despicable role here too). I believe that after a full interrogation, these folks who receive trials and those who were captured on the battlefield with weapons and outside the rules of war, should receive the full punishment that is appropriate. You have ignored the historical facts concerning illegal combatants and the treatment they have received from the Revolutionary War through World War II. Let me note that this was not uniformly draconian and that FDR waived the death sentence for at least two of the German saboteurs.

The Bush Administration has not even completed trials for almost all of the outrageous atrocities perpetrated onto the American people by Islamic Jihadists. You and your legislative colleagues on the court have seen to that.

Twice, I’ve had the privilege of visiting the Reagan Presidential Library. At my last visit I had the honor of paying my respects and saying a prayer at the president’s grave site. It was the least I could do since Ronald Reagan played such a key role in ending the Cold War and setting off a series of events that would allow me to become a parent, albeit of two children born in Siberia, so my family recently celebrated Fathers Day June 15 for the sixth time (see enclosed picture).

Three years ago I was fortunate to have my children meet former President Gorbachev when he visited my state.

My children and my family mean the world to me. By granting habeas corpus to folks who would slaughter my children, my wife, the rest of my family, my neighbors, my friends, my co-workers you have expressed a contempt of court for all Americans that destroys my ability to believe that there is still a rule of law in this country.

You will give more legal protection to these killers than the legal protections that I, an American citizen, possess when dealing with the IRS or in family court.

Ronald Reagan must be spinning in his grave because of your opinion in this latest terrorist edict. Resign. Resign in the disgrace contained within your edict. You have greenhoused the country one time too many.

Your judicial edict is not the U.S. Constitution I studied in school. It is not the U.S. Constitution.

Sadly and in tears,

Karl Peterjohn

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Related Posts

  • Trump-supporting QAnon seen as public security threat

  • Proceed with the presidential transition

  • Trump and Russia sanctions

  • Presidential approval

  • Border wall procedures criticized

%d bloggers like this: