Just in case there's anyone out there (of either party, but this is really aimed at those who agree with the administration's position) who doesn't understand why the Jose Padilla case is so important, I'd like to fast-forward a few years to a different administration and a different news article: 

Tom DeLay, Five Other Congressmen Held as Enemy Combatants
WASHINGTON (CNN) /April 12, 2009/ House majority leader Tom DeLay and five other Republican congressmen were arrested this morning as they stepped off their airplane after returning from what had been described as a fact-finding mission to Pakistan. The Clinton administration designated the six as "enemy combatants," and they have been held incommunicado in an undisclosed location.

Said the White House in an official statement, "Our intelligence agencies have learned that, during the course of this alleged 'fact-finding' trip, Congressman DeLay and the other members of his delegation were providing material aid and advice to known terrorist enemies of the United States. While we regret taking such an extreme action, the safety of the American people must always come first. President Hillary Clinton made the determination to exercise her authority under the Supreme Court's Padilla v. Rumsfeld ruling only after the most careful consideration of the risks involved, and the ability of these individuals to use their positions to undermine the security of the United States."

In its landmark 2004 Padilla v. Rumsfeld decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the President has the authority to designate individuals as "enemy combatants" if she believes they pose a threat to the security of the United States. Individuals designated as enemy combatants may be held without charge or access to a lawyer until the President judges they no longer pose a threat.

Reaction to this move was swift. Rep. Bob Holstein (R-WI) said, "This is truly an outrage. The President has produced no evidence of any sort, and this is clearly a direct attack on the administration's political enemies. You can rest assured we will fight this all the way to the Supreme Court."

In response, White House spokesman Mac Scott insisted that there was considerable evidence on which to hold the six, but declined to be more specific, citing national security reasons. Said Scott, "To be more specific would compromise our intelligence assets in the field, and seriously harm the progress we've made in the war on terrorism."

Additionally, there may be little recourse through the courts. If, as many observers believe, the six have been moved to the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, this would place them outside the jurisdiction of American courts, as has been previously ruled many times in prior cases involving enemy combatants held overseas.

Whatever the long-term outcome, this move promises to reshape the political landscape of Washington, as it effectively hands a majority in the narrowly divided House of Representatives to the Democrats. Some observers believe Clinton may take this opportunity to push her stalled domestic agenda, though the White House has not made any moves as yet.

The President has scheduled a news conference for 9 PM Eastern this evening, where she will discuss these arrests and other recent developments in the war on terrorism.

Disclaimer: This is a work of the purest fiction. I really don't think any of the real people named in here would be involved in anything even remotely like this. I chose the characters in order to emphasize that our constitutional protections exist for reasons much larger than any one person, party, or war.