It's true that Jose Padilla, the so-called "dirty bomber," is worthy of close review by law enforcement authorities.

Through his actions and his associates, he was clearly worth watching as a potential criminal or even terrorist threat to the United States.

But the way the federal government has handled Padilla — an American citizen — since his arrest some three years ago suggests the United States is far less interested than it professes in protecting the constitutional rights it believes threatened by global terrorism.

Padilla was arrested in 2002 by the FBI as a suspect in an alleged plot to set off radioactive bombs within the United States. He wasn't charged with any crime but was imprisoned, in a military brig as an "enemy combatant" with precious little access to legal help or the courts.

There he sat for three years until, on the eve of final debate over renewal of the USA Patriot Act, Padilla was indicted for being part of a conspiracy to "murder, maim and kidnap" people overseas. Nothing said about the dirty bomb or a later allegation that he intended to blow up apartment buildings in America using natural gas.

His indictment also comes just as the U.S. Supreme Court is hearing an appeal that it was unconstitutional to keep Padilla incarcerated as an "enemy combatant."

In case the neatness of that timing escapes you, the government has now filed papers with the high court saying the appeal was now moot since Padilla is no longer being held as an enemy combatant; rather he is now facing criminal charges.

Padilla's guilt or innocence will now be resolved by trial. Regardless, the Supreme Court should continue to review this case because it will settle whether the government has the right to detain individuals virtually forever simply by declaring them "enemy combatants."