Detainee Case Reflects ‘Interbranch Drama’
Updated: The latest Guantanamo detainee case before the U.S. Supreme Court, which asks whether federal courts have jurisdiction to hear the enemy combatant cases, “reflects an extraordinary interbranch drama,” the New York Times reports.
Last year, the court in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld struck down the military commission system because President Bush had acted without congressional authorization. Congress responded with a law authorizing the commissions and providing that courts do not have jurisdiction to hear habeas appeals by enemy combatants.
At issue in the latest case, Boumediene v. Bush, is whether the statute’s habeas provisions violate the Constitution’s suspension clause, which provides that Congress may not suspend habeas “unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.” The case will be argued on Wednesday.
The government contends that combatant status review tribunals are an adequate substitute for habeas review. Lawyers on both sides appear to be addressing their arguments to Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, considered the swing vote on the case.
Human rights activists are watching the case closely, Reuters reports.
The U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights wrote an amicus brief arguing the Guantanamo system violates international agreements. “Even in times of armed conflict, human-rights law applies,” it said.
SCOTUSblog has more case information.
Updated at 10:18 AM to include information from the Reuters story.
