Letting Terrorists Go Because Of Legal Technicalities?

I've been saying this for a long while, but now it seems as though my prediction will be born out albeit more slow in coming than I had thought. That is, there will be a day when, because of the egregious transgressions of the Constitution by members of the W, Rove and Co, we may actually see the courts forced to release dangerous people.

I'm not saying the man being held uncharged is dangerous, but the fact of the matter is that there is a reason why the W, Rove and Co is not allowed to detain people without charges in America.

The Bush administration cannot legally detain a U.S. resident it believes is an al-Qaida sleeper agent without charging him, a divided federal appeals court ruled Monday. The court said sanctioning the indefinite detention of civilians would have "disastrous consequences for the constitution — and the country."

Sleeper agent or not, it is not right to hold people without charging them - and if we have to let this man go because the W, Rove and Co is trampling over the constitution without regard, then he blows himself up in a crowded Starbuck's, who's to blame (aside from the would be suicide bomber himself)?