Enemy Combatant Detainees: Habeas Corpus Challenges in Federal Court Page: 4 of 45
This report is part of the collection entitled: Congressional Research Service Reports and was provided to UNT Digital Library by the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.
- Highlighting
- Highlighting On/Off
- Color:
- Adjust Image
- Rotate Left
- Rotate Right
- Brightness, Contrast, etc. (Experimental)
- Cropping Tool
- Download Sizes
- Preview all sizes/dimensions or...
- Download Thumbnail
- Download Small
- Download Medium
- Download Large
- High Resolution Files
- IIIF Image JSON
- IIIF Image URL
- Accessibility
- View Extracted Text
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Enemy Combatant Detainees: Habeas
Corpus Challenges in Federal Court
In Hamdi v. Rumsfeld,l a divided Supreme Court declared that "a state of war
is not a blank check for the president"and ruled that persons deemed "enemy
combatants" have the right to challenge their detention before a judge or other
"neutral decision-maker." The Court did not decide whether the same right applies
to aliens held as enemy combatants outside of the United States, but held in Rasul v.
Bush2 that federal courts have jurisdiction to hear habeas petitions by or on behalf of
such detainees. The latter decision reversed the holding of the Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit, which had agreed with the Bush Administration that
no U.S. court has jurisdiction to hear petitions for habeas corpus by or on behalf of
the detainees because they are aliens and are detained outside the sovereign territory
of the United States. Lawyers filed dozens of petitions on behalf of the detainees in
the District Court for the District of Columbia, where judges reached conflicting
conclusions as to whether the detainees have any enforceable rights to challenge their
treatment and detention.
After the Supreme Court granted certiorari to hear a challenge by one of the
detainees to his trial by military tribunal, Congress passed the Detainee Treatment
Act of 2005 (DTA). The DTA requires uniform standards for interrogation of
persons in the custody of the Department of Defense (DOD), and expressly bans
cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment of detainees in the custody of any U.S.
agency. At the same time, however, it divested the courts of jurisdiction to hear
challenges by those detained at Guantanamo Bay based on their treatment or living
conditions. The DTA also includes a modified version of the Graham Amendment
(S.Amdt. 2516 to S. 1042, 109th Cong., "the Graham-Levin Amendment"), which
eliminates the federal courts' statutory jurisdiction over habeas claims by aliens
challenging their detention at Guantanamo Bay, but provides for limited appeals of
status determinations made pursuant to the DOD procedures for Combatant Status
Review Tribunals (CSRTs) or by military commissions.
In Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, decided June 29, 2006, the Supreme Court rejected the
government's argument that the DTA divested it of jurisdiction to hear the case, and
reviewed the validity of military commissions established to try suspected terrorists
of violations of the law of war, pursuant to President Bush's military order. The
Court did not revisit its 2004 opinion in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld upholding the President's
authority to detain individuals in connection with antiterrorism operations, and did
not resolve whether the petitioner could claim prisoner-of-war (POW) status, but held
1 542 U.S. 507 (2004).
2 542 U.S. 466 (2004).
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This report can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Matching Search Results
View 45 places within this report that match your search.Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Report.
Elsea, Jennifer K. & Thomas, Kenneth R. Enemy Combatant Detainees: Habeas Corpus Challenges in Federal Court, report, June 26, 2007; Washington D.C.. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc816886/m1/4/?q=Congressional%20Research%20Service%20%28CRS%29%20Reports%20regarding%20Enemy%20Combatants: accessed April 24, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.