Once upon a time there was a young professor of constitutional law who taught students the meaning of adhering to the principles of our Constitution. Ah, but that was then, and now is now. The Obama Administration is defending former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld against charges he violated constitutional rights of an American citizen. However, a judge is allowing an Army veteran to proceed with his case against Rumsfeld.

The individual worked for a contractor and was assigned as a translator working in a facility which housed “high value detainees.” He was getting ready to come home when seized by the military, placed in solitary confinement(a hole in ground was his toilet) and subjected to abuse and threats of violence by his interrogators. They charged he had stolen secrets and worked with militants who were fighting against American forces in Iraq. After a few months , he was  allowed to leave and NO charges were filed against him.

The man is now suing Donald Rumsfeld on grounds he personally approved torture procedures against those detained. The Justice Department is defending Rumsfeld on grounds a civilian judge can not review wartime decisions. Naturally, they insist to investigate this case will lead to disclosure of “sensitive” information.  Anytime anyone challenges the US military, the argument of “sensitive information”is offered as reason not to tell the truth.

Judge James Gwin made clear: “The court finds no convincing reason that United States citizens in Iraq should or must lose previously substantive due process  protections denied during long term detention  in a conflict zone abroad.” Amen!