Justices grill Gitmo detainees' lawyer

By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer
5 Dec 2007
WASHINGTON - A lawyer for the detainees at Guantanamo Bay underwent a barrage of questions Wednesday from Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Antonin Scalia, with the attorney portraying the case as a fundamental test of the U.S. system of justice.
...
Roberts and Scalia questioned whether the detainees are entitled to hearings in civilian courts.

"Show me one case" down through the centuries where circumstances similar to those at Guantanamo Bay entitled an alien to challenge his detention in civilian courts, said Scalia.
[emphasis added]

Yes, well, that's the point, isn't it? "Down through the centuries" circumstances similar to those at Guantanamo Bay have been signatures of lawless, despotic regimes! My understanding of MY COUNTRY is that it is a country of laws, not arbitrary power.

The supposed "legal basis" for denying Guantanamo detainees the right to challenge their detention is "last year's Military Commissions Act, strips federal courts of their ability to hear detainee cases." [quote lifted from the AP article cited above]

Though I am NOT a Constitutional scholar - what I know about the Constitution I learned in 8th-grade Civics - it seems to me that the following pretty much limits Congress's power to circumvent the federal courts:
U.S. Constitution
Article I, section 8
"The Congress shall have power to... constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court"
[emphasis added]

Under this paragraph, Congress hath not the competence to place Military Tribunals outside the federal court system - at the very least, the Supreme Court is superior to these Tribunals.

Am I missing something?

Stop the madness!