assess a assess in cases or controversies the constitutionality of a law that is challenged in the context of a specific case or controversy. president washington, george washington, asked the supreme court for an advisory opinion in his first term on a disputed legal issue. actually, it might havie been hs second term. president george washington asked for an opinion. the supreme court respectfully wrote back and said we don t provide advisory opinions. we only decide cases or controversies, thereby, i think, underscoring the point you re making with your question, which is constitutionality of laws as assessed as assessed in the first instance by congress and the executive. so it would be not it would not be inappropriate for us as members of the legislative branch to decide to protect
there was an american citizen involved. you are right, also, of course, you have studied this as much as anyone, but the court did resolve the case very quickly, and the opinion, i have spent many an hour trying to decipher certain pracaragraphs for cases have had. it s not easy. the court, to its credit, give a little credit, did have an eight-hour oral argument. i read the transcript of that to try to figure out what was going on in the opinion that did not unlock the box completely for me on what was going on in the kieran opinion. your point, justice scalia said it was not the court s finest hour. it was a rush. it was a rush. and rushes, sometimes the court has to rush, but rush decisions in a judicial context sometimes aren t always the best. on that point, would you be open to the idea of bringing back the era of the eight-hour
on u.s. soil. there was some discussion surrounding this suggesting that ex parte might respond to this. you don t need to respond to this, but i think it s a point that needs to be mentioned. justice scalia mentioned in his dissent in homdy that ex parte curran was not this court s finest hour. in fact, what happened was the case was argued, it was decided the next day. the saboteurs were taken out and executed the next week. then the opinion itself was issued many months later. so, again, i m not asking you to opine on the ongoing validity of ex parte current, but the point is you seem to agree that congress certainly has the authority to protect liberty, notwithstanding the possibility that the supreme court might not step in?
absolutely. a couple of points in response to that, senator, if i might. justice scalia, of course, decisi dissented in that case, joined by justice stevens. one of his more powerful dissents on individual liberty. one of his more pour dissents protecting individual liberty there, ruling justice scalia with justice stevens that it was impercent miscible to hold an american citizen in long-term military detention, and i thought that was an important opinion of his. when i gave a talk, justice scalia identified that as one of his most important opinions and a very powerful opinion. on the kieran opinion itself, it dealt with some many who were not american citizens. you re right.