Page values for "The Justices' Refrain"

Jump to navigation Jump to search

"_pageData" values

1 row is stored for this page
FieldField typeValue
_creationDateDatetimeJune 17, 2008 5:30:47 PM
_modificationDateDatetimeJune 17, 2008 5:30:47 PM
_creatorStringYaron Koren
_fullTextSearchtext{{Item |author=The Washington Post editorial board |source=The Washington Post |date=June 13, 2008 |url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/12/AR2008061203664.html |quote="A 5 to 4 majority of the court correctly concluded that habeas corpus, the ancient right to contes ...
_categoriesList of String, delimiter: |Items
_numRevisionsInteger1
_isRedirectBooleanNo
_pageNameOrRedirectStringThe Justices' Refrain
_pageIDOrRedirectInteger4,395
_lastEditorStringYaron Koren
_pageIDInteger4,395
_pageNamePageThe Justices' Refrain
_pageTitleString

The Justices' Refrain

_pageNamespaceInteger0

"Items" values

1 row is stored for this page
FieldField typeValue
AuthorList of Page, delimiter: ,The Washington Post editorial board
SourcePageThe Washington Post
DateDateJune 13, 2008
URLURLhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/12/AR2008061203664.html
QuoteText"A 5 to 4 majority of the court correctly concluded that habeas corpus, the ancient right to contest one's detention, extends to those held at the U.S. Navy base in Guantanamo Bay. Although it only leases the property from Cuba, the United States exerts complete legal and military control over the base; those held there have nowhere to challenge their detentions other than U.S. courts. To have forbidden the detainees access to those courts would have left the executive branch almost unfettered power to hold people indefinitely -- a proposition that is untenable."
SummaryWikitext

The Justices' Refrain by The Washington Post editorial board (The Washington Post, June 13, 2008) (view)

"Opinions" values

1 row is stored for this page
FieldField typeAllowed valuesValue
TopicPageBoumediene v. Bush
Position_fragmentStringSupreme Court was correct in its ruling
PositionPageBoumediene v. Bush / Supreme Court was correct in its ruling
Position_linkWikitext

Supreme Court was correct in its ruling

StanceStringfor · mixed · againstfor