This column originally appeared on the American Thinker website on November 21, 2009.

The Obama administration’s absurd, unnecessary, and dangerous decision to prosecute 9/11 terrorists in a civilian court is plumbing the depths of what Charles Krauthammer has labeled “Bush Derangement Syndrome” (BDS): the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency — nay, the very existence of George W. Bush.

If they can convict some terrorists in the process, get ready for double-fist-bumps all around.

At the detention center in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM), the confessed mastermind of the Sept. 11 terrorist attack, […]

If I were asked to defend 9/11 terror suspect Khalid Sheik Mohammed here's what I'd tell him. Attorney General Eric Holder announced on Nov. 13 that the Obama administration would be transferring handpicked terrorists to New York City for a civilian trial, giving them every constitutional right enjoyed by Americans. This creates a legal nightmare, endangering our national security and jeopardizing our war effort. And President Obama may end up as a political casualty, having abdicated his constitutional responsibility on this issue to his subordinate.

Listening to government leaders and media avoid any connection between Islamist terrorism and the murderous attack at Ft. Hood is, to use their terminology, about as "twisted" and "nuts" as it gets.

On Nov. 9, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in two cases on whether it violates the Eighth Amendment for a minor (under age 18) to be sentenced to life in prison without parole where there's no homicide involved. The answer to that question should be "no," but it's not clear which way the Court will go.

Stung by a rising tide of resistance and a closing window of opportunity, House Democrats have unleashed a new version of ObamaCare, weighing in at 1,990 pages and with a $1 trillion price tag. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi promises to ram it through quickly, exhibiting a disdain for her countrymen that makes Marie Antoinette look like a populist.

Dear Speaker Pelosi and Mr. Gibbs: On Oct. 20, Politico published my column in which I explained how the individual mandate in the health care bill is unconstitutional, since there is no constitutional provision authorizing such legislation and it falls outside the scope of the Constitution's Commerce Clause.

My Oct. 20 column in POLITICO ("Making Individuals Buy Insurance Is Unconstitutional") explained why Obamacare's individual mandate is unconstitutional. Erwin Chemerinsky then wrote a rebuttal Oct. 23 ("Health Care Reform Is Constitutional"), claiming to explain how I was wrong.