If one president can do it, any president can do it, which means the constitution has no real authority or meaning.
I think we need to be careful about oversimplifying the Guantanamo situation. It's disingenuous to say that Guantanamo violates the constitution and that therefore the constitution is being ignored. The reality of the situation is that Guantanamo (along with other Bush administration programs) is extremely controversial, but still being examined.
Honestly, if there was a clear consensus among U.S. lawmakers and the Supreme Court regarding the unconstitutionality of these programs then they would be shut down. There are plenty of powerful congressmen who would fight to do just that. Indeed, we frequently hear about investigations and hearings related to these programs.
But it's an ongoing process. There are also lawmakers who believe these programs to be constitutional. Until the controversy is decided then I don't think it's fair to say that the president is ignoring the constitution, because from his perspective he almsot certainly is not. If the Supreme Court passed a ruling that the program is unconsitutional, and the Bush administration refused to shut it down,
then they would be ignoring the constitution.
illegally tapped phone line
The NSA wiretapping program is an excellent example of the process at work. Arguments can be made both for and against the program, and there have already been court rulings going in both directions. Although the process will undoubtedly be slow, eventually all the appeals will settle and we'll have a final ruling on the issue. At that point you can be pretty certain that the president will abide by the courts' decisions... or dissolve the senate prior to testing the Death Star on Alderaan as a show of power :)
)
