Branch. In an odd reversal of roles, the dissenters, in an opinion by
Justice Stevens, the author of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, relied on the views of the Executive Branch as to the scope of the immunities here, to reach his conclusion. On the other hand,
Justice Thomas, who complained (rightly in my view) about the lack of deference to the Executive in Hamdan, does not even acknowledge that the Court is adopting an interpretation at odds with the Executive Branch here. Did the
justices trade law clerks, just for fun?...