Today’s NYT editorializes against the Congressional Research Service’s decision to dismiss Col. Morris Davis because of his public writings on proposed civil trials of detainees. It begins:
Morris Davis, a retired Air Force colonel who was chief military prosecutor at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, showed courage and respect for democratic principles when he resigned rather than follow orders to use evidence obtained through torture. We wish the Congressional Research Service would live up to Mr. Davis’s example.
The service fired Mr. Davis after he wrote about how detainees should be tried. On Nov. 11, The Wall Street Journal published an opinion article in which he argued against the Obama administration’s decision to try some detainees before military commissions and others in federal court. The same day, The Washington Post ran a letter to the editor about the ability of federal courts to try detainees. He wrote as a private citizen and did not mention his employer.
Later in the month, Mr. Davis was fired from his position as assistant director of the foreign affairs, defense and trade division, of the research service. He was told that his writing violated its policies, showed poor judgment and interfered with the service’s duty to remain objective and nonpartisan.
My prior post on Col. Davis’ firing is here.
drunkdriver says:
I assume he was informed when he took the job about his employer’s policies?
December 17, 2009, 10:16 amCJColucci says:
Damn lib’rul media!
December 17, 2009, 11:16 amAndrew says:
I dunno for sure, but maybe Colonel Davis would have been on more solid footing if he hadn’t accused Judge Mukasey of “fear-mongering worthy of former vice president Dick Cheney.” CRS does have a legitimate interest in protecting its reputation for impartiality. I hope that Colonel Davis will continue to speak out, though, so that we may all have the benefit of his experience and knowledge.
December 17, 2009, 12:18 pmkrs says:
I agree with Andrew.
Good for Col. Davis for sticking to his principles and speaking out, and I hope he continues to do so. But I find it difficult to fault the CRS for deciding that such speaking out is inconsistent with its interests. The New York Times seems to think that no one who expresses an opinion they agree with should ever be fired from a job for it.
December 17, 2009, 12:31 pmfirst history says:
If Col. Davis wants to speak out and offer his opinions, there are dozens of think tanks in Washington that will pay him for them. CRS is not one of them. As someone who worked at CRS as an intern, I can testify that CRS reports are scrubbed to the point of being boring, and they are scrupulous about being fair and balanced.
December 17, 2009, 12:44 pmArthurKirkland says:
Andrew’s point about the swipes at Mukasey and Cheney, coupled with reflection about the institutional role of the writer’s employer, are causing me to reconsider this case.
Along a somewhat related line, it sounds like someone with appropriate authority should arrange for Col. Davis to replace his former superior(s) at Guantanamo.
December 17, 2009, 2:14 pmNYT on CRS Dismissal of Col. Davis | Liberal Whoppers says:
[...] posted here: NYT on CRS Dismissal of Col. Davis Share this [...]
December 17, 2009, 3:19 pm