The courts 63 judgment on june 28, 2004, reversed a d. Military commissions in the global war on terrorism, both by jennifer k. Syllabus opinion stevens concurrence kennedy dissent scalia html version pdf version. Circuit decision which had held that the judiciary. Naval base in guantanamo bay, cuba, brought several suits to contest the legality and conditions of their confinement.
But justice jacksons cautionary words were subject to a revised reading by the rasul court, in a manner that came close to a silent overruling. Petitioner david hicks, an australian, has been designated by the president under the november, 2001 military order. Rumsfeld9 that have subjected the bush administrations war on terror policies to the scrutiny of the judicial branch. Justice stevens delivered the opinion of the court and was joined by justices oconnor, souter, ginsberg and breyer. Bush, and oral arguments were heard on april 20, 2004.
Odah and rasul are being held at the guantanamo bay facility in cuba, and hamdi, possibly a u. Bush 503 worth in rasul, is a remarkable one in supreme court history. Stone writes fred korematsus amicus brief, as history repeats. Updated january, 2005 federation of american scientists. Learn vocabulary, terms, and more with flashcards, games, and other study tools. Bush and the case of boumediene ruled against t he executives claim that there is n o cons titutional right to habeas c orpus. Petitioners shafiq rasul and asif iqbal were recently designated for release to the custody of great britain although they remain at guantanamo pending release. Bush and the intraterritorial constitution by baher.
Extraterritorial rights and constitutional methodology. Certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the district of columiba circuit no. Padilla,3 rasul is the case that will affect the most people and most affect future governmental operations. He supreme court of the united states s hafiq r asul, et al. Petitioners cases were then consolidated into two proceedings. Pdf discourse and judicial deference to the executive. After rasul, petitioners cases were consolidated and entertained in two separate proceedings. As for petitioner rasul, in the summer of 2001, he allegedly took a hiatus from studying for his computer.
Dec, 2012 riley mickelsens presentation on rasul v. Audio transcription for oral argument april 20, 2004 in rasul v. Bush and the intraterritorial constitution is one part of a broader project to develop a broad, substantive understanding of the rasul case, as a challenge to the conventional view that rasul offers little more than a narrow jurisdictional holding. Jul 01, 2014 ten years ago saturday, the supreme court ruled, in rasul v. Presidential war powersthe hamdi, rasul, and hamdan. We also owe debts of gratitude to innumerable scholars whose work has informed us but who will not in every case be cited, due to our commitment to keep the article within a prescribed word limit. Nov 06, 2003 the brief was filed in the cases of khaled odah v. Our amici briefs with a broad coalition in hamdi v. Bush opinion of the court cent civilians, destroyed hundreds of millions of dollars of property, and severely damaged the u. For a summary of rasul and related cases, see the supreme court and detainees in the war on terrorism.
Argued april 20, 2004sdecided june 28, 2004 pursuant to congress joint resolution authorizing the use of necessary. World heritage encyclopedia, the aggregation of the largest online encyclopedias available, and the most definitive. If you wish to see the entire case, please consult pacer directly. Bush the court considered jurisdictional issues of legal appeals from citizens in guantanamo bay naval base. Jonakait introduction of the three recent supreme court cases concerning enemy combatants, hamdi v. As will be told in this essay, the story reveals the intriguing extent to which stevenss work in ahrens over fifty years ago influenced the reasoning, if not the result, in rasul.
After the current decision, the ccr filed the case al odah. The hamdan case addressed whether the rights protected by the geneva convention could be enforced. A case in which the court ruled that united states courts have jurisdiction to consider legal appeals filed on behalf of foreign citizens held by the united states military in guantanamo bay naval base, cuba. Extraterritorial rights and constitutional methodology after.
Other detainees, invoking the jurisdictional provisions of. Rumsfeld was part of ccrs broader efforts to end indefinite detention without charge or trial, achieve a just closure of guantanamo, and ensure accountability for u. Bush and a companion case will be announced by justice stevens. Bush, which held that the habeas statute extends to noncitizen detainees at guantanamo. They say they are innocents caught up in the fog of war, and they have now been imprisoned for. Bush and joined it to a related case involving guantanamo detainees. Bush, decided this day, was one of four major supreme court decisions in which the court limited struck down key aspects of president george w.
Petitioner shafiq rasul and asif iqbal are citizens of the united kingdom and are presently held in respondents custody at the united states naval base at guantanamo bay, cuba. In response to the attacks, congress passed a joint resolution authorizing the president to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or per. They say they are innocents caught up in the fog of war, and they have now been imprisoned for more than a year and a half. Well hear 4 argument now on 03334, shafiq rasul vs. Habeas corpus petitions of guantanamo bay detainees. This court also has jurisdiction pursuant to the suspension. Jun 28, 2004 the supreme courts ruling in rasul marked the start of heavy litigation on the lawfulness of the detention and treatment of guantanamo bays detainees. Its contents were merged into habeas corpus petitions of guantanamo bay detainees. Summary and analysis of recent decisions, crs report rs21884. In 2006, congress passed the military commissions act of 2006 mca.
District court on behalf of hicks, rasul, and iqbal the habeas petition challenges the presidential executive order of november, 2001, which authorized indefinite detention without due process of law. The supreme court in rasul concluded, albeit in dictum, that, in light of the particular circumstances surrounding their imprisonment, the guantanamo. The constitutional issue presented in the instant cases was not reached in rasul. This article discusses some of the many questions left open by rasul v. In that case, several guantanamo detainees had filed a petition for habeas corpus seeking release from custody, access to counsel, freedom from interrogations, and other relief. The bush administration took the position in all of the guantanamo litigation that guantanamo detainees could not come to federal court via a writ of habeas corpus because habeas corpus did not apply outside of the united states. The 63 ruling on june 29, 2004 reversed a washington d. In the first, the district judge granted the governments motion to dismiss, holding that the detainees had no rights that could be vindi together with no. Executive and judicial overreaction in the guantanamo cases. The federal trial court dismissed this case for lack of jurisdiction. The supreme court, habeas corpus, and the war on terror. Bush is a 2004 decision in which the united states supreme court held that detainees captured in afghanistan and held at guantanamo bay in cuba could challenge their confinement in american courts by writ of habeas corpus.
There is at least one critical difference between the constitutionalisms of the twentyfirst and nineteenth centuries. The two cases were consolidated under the name rasul v. The discussion was closed on 21 november 2010 with a consensus to merge. Eisentrager, ahrens, and braden eisentrager, the rasul majority observed, was decided under the re gime of ahrens v. Rasul and a companion case were brought by two sets of foreign nationals who were captured in afghanistan, designated as enemy combatants and detained at the u. This was mostly due to the efforts of the center for constitutional rights ccr and cocounsels, which had filed the rasul case.
It did not take long for critics of the courts deci. District courts ruling that it has no jurisdiction to handle wrongful imprisonment cases for foreign. The act eliminates federal courts jurisdiction to hear habeas applications from detainees who. After these decisions were affirmed by a court of appeals, the supreme court granted a writ of certiorari to hear the consolidated cases as rasul v. On july 3, 2003, the president designated david hicks and five other detainees as being held pursuant to the presidents military order of november, 2001, concerning the detention, treatment, and trial of certain noncitizens in the war against terrorism.
The aclu is part of a broadbased coalition that filed a friendofthecourt brief calling on the supreme court to assure that the detainees being held at guantanamo have access to the courts to challenge the legality of their detention. Bush,15 a way that neither the bush administration nor its opponents have suggested. Bush audio transcription for opinion announcement june 28, 2004 in rasul v. In a 6to3 opinion written by justice john paul stevens, the court found that the degree of control exercised by the united states over the guantanamo bay base was. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history. Lexis 4760 brought to you by free law project, a nonprofit dedicated to creating high quality open legal information.