Who Wants to Be an Enemy Combatant?
The Supreme Court ruled in Boumediene v. Bush that the writ of habeas corpus applied to Guantanamo Bay detainees. The case was the first extension of habeas corpus – a legal tool to challenge the legality of one’s imprisonment or detention – to aliens detained on foreign soil. The decision was 5-4, and it quite riled the dissenting justices. Demonstrating their typical originalist belief that ancient legal doctrines can never adapt to new circumstances, both Antonin Scalia and Chief Justice John Roberts filed cantankerous dissenting opinions. Both justices felt the foreign extension of the writ of habeas was unnecessary because a) it never had been done before and b) Congress, in its infinite wisdom, enacted the Detainee Treatment Act that was supposed to do the same thing for those unfortunate souls in Gitmo. Even though the Detainee Treatment Act explicitly denied the application of habeas to Gitmo detainees, the dissenters thought it was good enough because it provided perfunctory o
Related Questions
- Does being an enemy combatant who took US citizenship under false pretenses entitle him to full immunity?
- My mom/grandfather/best friend/worst enemy is coming to visit me and wants to use the internet. Can they?
- What is the difference between an enemy combatant, an unlawful combatant, and a prisoner of war?
