In today's Washington Post, two stories highlight problems in the U.S. justice system that deserve the attention of every American. On the frontpage, we read about a black man, arrested for allegedly killing a white police officer, who died of strangulation at a Prince Georges County (Maryland) correction facility, and while isolated from other inmates. According to an anonymous jail employee, "any officer can enter the unit where White was held," reported the Post.

[Prince Georges County Executive Jack B. Johnson] expressed anger not only at the "horrid" death of a police officer but also at the apparent killing of the suspect in the case. "If we have vigilante justice, our society will fall apart," he said. "If we tolerate these kinds of acts, the courts are superfluous." (Washington Post)

Superfluous courts appear to be just what the Bush administration had in mind when it prosecuted Huzaifa Parhat, a Chinese Uighur (Muslim) held at Guantanamo (page A3). A panel of three judges, two Republican appointees and one Democrat, heard the case at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. In a redacted decision released on Monday, the judges criticized the administration for arguments that, if not overruled, would render "superfluous both the role of the Tribunal and the role that Congress assigned to this court."

[T]he government insists that the statements made in the documents are reliable because the State and Defense Departments would not have put them in intelligence documents were that not the case. [Ruling]

Fortunately, the Court did not go along with the reasoning that "whatever the government says must be treated as true." (Undoubtedly, the judges had all read about the administration's handling of pre-Iraq war intelligence.) But, it is disturbing, nevertheless, that government lawyers tried to slip that through.

The judges also lambasted the government for basing its argument on evidence that failed even to pass the laugh test. The court pointed out that the U.S. military presented "three pieces of secret evidence" declaring the detainee an enemy combatant; but "[r]ather than being three pieces of evidence, the court said, the documents from the State and Defense Departments may have all cited the same, single source." [Miami Herald]

Lewis Carroll notwithstanding, the fact that the government has "said it thrice"' does not make an allegation true. See LEWIS CARROLL, THE HUNTING OF THE SNARK 3 (1876) ("I had said it thrice: What I tell you three times is true.") [Ruling]

Arguments like these would be outrageous enough in a civil trial seeking monetary damages; but, when employed to deprive people of their liberty and possibly their lives, they are nothing less than diabolical. What message does the administration send, in the process, to law enforcement agencies and prosecutors at all levels of government? It encourages disrespect for due process, vigilante justice that, as Mr. Johnson noted, promote disintegration of our society. The cases warn all Americans to look sharp, lest we wake one morning to find that the means for enforcing all of our other freedoms has been stolen in the night by an unjust and unaccountable government.