Lack of SCOTUS Restraint May Cost Lives

Such is perfectly illustrated by the recent Hamdan v. Rumsfeld ruling where the military tribunals that were set up to try the captured terrorists at Guantanamo Bay were struck down. Professor John Yoo, who worked in the Bush Administration from 2001-2003, further explains:

The court's decision in Hamdan vs. Rumsfeld ignores the basic workings of our separation of powers and will hamper the ability of future presidents to respond to emergencies with the forcefulness and vision of a Lincoln or an FDR.

Long-standing U.S. practice recognizes that the president, as commander in chief, plays the leading role in wartime. Presidents have started wars without congressional authorization, and they have exercised complete control over military strategy and tactics. They can act with a speed, unity and secrecy that the other branches of government cannot match. By contrast, legislatures are large, diffuse and slow. Their collective design may make them better for deliberating over policy, but at the cost of delay and lack of resolve.