Coverage of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld Arguments.

Yesterday SCOTUS heard arguments in the case of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, concerning the validity of war crimes tribunals set up by President Bush. I won't provide much personal commentary, but there is plenty of it elsewhere in the blogosphere:

SCOTUS Blog has a nice recap of how the arguments went. It is worth noting, when reviewing SCOTUS Blog's impressions, that the firm is co-counsel for Hamdan. According to SCOTUS Blog, the Court "probed deeply into the validity of the war crimes tribunals set up by President Bush, and came away looking decidedly skeptical. From all appearances during the 90-minute argument, the Court may have some difficulty fashioning an opinion, but perhaps not a result: the existing 'military commission' scheme may well fail." Additionally, SCOTUS Blog noted that "[w]ith only eight Justices participating (Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., is recused) it appeared that Justice Anthony M. Kennedy might well emerge as holding the decisive vote. In a variety of ways, Kennedy seemed troubled about the legitimacy of the tribunals as presently arranged." (Transcript of Argument.)

Georgetown Law has posted a link to the audio from the arguments, for your listening pleasure.

The Pocket Part has a general overview of the case, as well as positions from both sides of the issues.

ACS Blog posted yesterday about Scalia sitting in on the arguments and hearing the case. As I posted about last weekend, there was controversy about whether Scalia should continue to hear this case in light of comments he made recently in Switzerland. Observers of the arguments have reported that Scalia appeared to be the most amenable to the government's position (not surprisingly).

The Legal Reader also posted a brief summary yesterday, with links to the The Washington Post coverage.

Jurist has a link-rich summary of the case, it's history, and the arguments.

Finally, the folks over at TalkLeft also had a summary of the goings-on.

Pretty much all of the above posts contain links to even more analysis and commentary on the case.

**UPDATE (3/30/06):**
Miami Herald Article (March 29, 2006)
SCOTUS Blog Link to Transcripts from Argument