so the court refused to grant the writ of habeas corpus there. interestingly enough, one of the things that struck me about this was that 27 out of -- of the 27 cases brought before the military commission, only 21 were convvcted. and there is a mythology about military commissions that i think needs correction in our culture. there is a suggestion that they are -- that they don't operate fairly and that they don't provide an opportunity for innocent individuals to be adjudicated in a context which is acceptable. what i have noticed in my understanding of military commissions, in that case, about 77% conviction rate, after the second world war, generally, military commissions, about upper 80's in conviction rate. as my experience at the justice department said that the conviction rates of u.s. attorneys are usually in the mid to upper 90's and anything below that on the part of a u.s. attorney would be an embarrassment. it's not an automatic that if you have an adjudication or due process that is undertaken by way of military commission rather th

so the court refused to grant the writ of habeas corpus there. interestingly enough, one of the things that struck me about this was that 27 out of -- of the 27 cases brought before the military commission, only 21 were convvcted. and there is a mythology about military commissions that i think needs correction in our culture. there is a suggestion that they are -- that they don't operate fairly and that they don't ovide an opportunity for innocent individuals to be adjudicated in a context which is acceptable. what i have noticed in my understanding of military commissions, in that case, about 77% conviction rate, after the second world war, generally, military commissions, about upper 80's in convictn rate. as my experience at the justice department said that the conviction rates of u.s. attorneys are usually in the mid to upper 90's and anything below that on the part of a u.s. attorney would be an embarrassment. it's not an automatic that if you have an adjudication or due process that is undertaken by way of milary commission rather than the

he files a writ of habeas corpus. the judge who is the federal judge in the area issued and said bring the right to be for me. we will indicate the appropriateness of thihis detention. jackson was not -- you know we have this difficulty with members of the judiciary later on. jackson was not to be intimidated. in some of bringing in the editorial writer coming incarcerated the judge. -- instead of bringing in the editorial writer, a key incarcerated the judge. he took the judge to the edge of the military district. he gave them the right foot of fellowship. this story has all the charm that fiction would have, except you would not believe it were it fiction. the news of the peace treaty comes. civil government is restored in new orleans. the judge to let issued the order of habeas corpus which had not been followed, orders and finds jackson in contempt in court. he fines him $1,000 in 1815. $1,000 in those days was rough enough money to buy between 2.5 and three midwestern states. that was a lot of money. it jackson p

writ of habeas corpus. the federal judge issued the writ and said bring the writer of the editorial. he ordered the editorial writer to be brought forward. jackson had his difficulties with members of the judiciary later on when it came to stories about the bank. instead of bringing in the editorial writer, he incarcerated the judge. he eventually relented and took the judge to the edge of the military district at which time he gave him the right foot of fellowship. the judge -- this story has all the charm that fiction would have except you would not believe it were fiction. the news of the peace treaty comes. the civil government is restored in new orleans. the judge who would issued the order of habeas corpus which had not been followed and had been disobeyed, he orders and finds jackson in contempt of court and finds jackson $1,000 in 1850. $1,000 in those days was enough money to buy between three midwestern states. that was a lot of states. jackson paid it and went into his career as a public servant

imagine, imagine listen to paul and then put the right to vote or the right to file a petition for habeas corpus. >> i'm quoting the supreme core. all of this is not paul. >> ifill: let him finish and i'll let you respond. >> all of these restrictions and rules. next thing we'll be bringing back the poll tax or the tax for... this is a freedom for all. >> the court first in the heller case and they repeated the language here. they mentioned the first amendment right is not unlimited. you can't liable someone. you can't fire in a crowded theater. you can't have pornography in public. that's part of what they're saying here. there's balancing that needs to go on. the sad fact is there aren't very many laws restricting access to guns on the books. only a few at the federal level. only a few communities and states that have done anything. most of the time elected officials have been scared by people like wayne from passing anything saying that's a second amendment right. that's a second amendment right. we can't even do background checks from sellers at gun shows because wayne fights those. >> ifill

there is habeas corpus to you in. terms of testing i thin it is based o a solid law of war prciples. the third, t cortes said at some point in the unravel if this one turns out tobe vry different than all the other and with that pot would obviously -- would like to be able to anticipate that andet out in front of it and certnly deal with that before it happens. >> you know, we still combat troops deployed abroad in ghanistan and that one of thebg fat or is that the court identified. so i think not right now, but you can't ignore altogether a statement like that from t supreme court. you need to be on the lookout for. >> there's time for one more question. >> hi, evan press, the "washington journal." the shahzad case in which he courtside distaste tht there was obviously waiver of miranda for several da withrationing suested that perhaps you don't need any changesto mira me, t seemed to avert just fine. can youddress the queions might be arising from that? >> yeah, so n't ta about shahzad per sut i'll use it as a jping

. >> the think we would death had to have entertained the writ of habeas corpus? >> according to the court's latest pronouncements in america, perhaps, your honor. [laughter] but more importantly, we are not asking for and on the balance intervention. we are asking the court to do is to do that which is right, which is to hold henry criminally responsible for acts that were not justified. >> wouldn't this cause everything to hesitate? it is too late for henry, but if we make this decision, every king will has to take on the fieed of battle. until he consults with his lawyer. [laughter] >> i should hope that everything would hesitate before killing innocent prisoners. i think that is the whole point of the law of necessity and the law of nations. >> while we're talking about criminal responsibility, ttis is a civil case. >> this is a civil case before killings that were unjustified. >> as far as the criminal case, that is over and done with. that is what is before the war crimes tribunal. henry was acquitted before the war crimes tribunal. now we are in a civil cas