Skip to content

Category Archives: Detention: Law of

DCCA: USG Must Respond to Detainees’ Petition for En Banc Rehearing in Hatim

By
Tuesday, September 23, 2014 at 11:00 AM

Now this is interesting. Last week, detainees Saeed Mohammed Saleh Hatim, Abdurrahman al-Shubati and Fadel Hentif together sought en banc rehearing in Hatim v. Obama, the so-called “counsel access” case. Yesterday, the D.C. Circuit ordered the United States to respond to the detainees’ arguments supporting rehearing—a summary of which can be found here—within 15 days. Stay tuned.

CRS Report on Major Court Rulings Concerning Enemy Combatant Detainees

By
Monday, September 22, 2014 at 1:21 PM

The Congressional Research Service has put out a new report entitled “Judicial Activity Concerning Enemy Combatant Detainees: Major Court Rulings.” The summary reads, in part: This report discusses major judicial opinions concerning suspected enemy combatants detained in the conflict with Al Qaeda and the Taliban. The report addresses all Supreme Court decisions concerning enemy combatants. It . . .
Read more »

Detainees File Petition for Rehearing En Banc in Allaithi v. Rumsfeld

By
Tuesday, August 26, 2014 at 8:58 AM

Yesterday, plaintiff-appellants in Allaithi v. Rumsfeld filed their petition for a rehearing en banc, two months after the D.C. Circuit affirmed the district court’s ruling that six detainees subjected to prolonged detention and alleged mistreatment at Guantanamo did not sufficiently allege that the officials who authorized and supervised their detention acted outside the scope of their . . .
Read more »

GAO: Defense Department Violated Law In Bergdahl-GTMO Detainee Swap

By
Thursday, August 21, 2014 at 4:05 PM

So concludes this report from the Government Accountability Office, which apparently was written in response to a request by various Senators.  The document opens: This responds to your June 13, 2014, request for our opinion on whether the Department of Defense (DOD) incurred obligations in violation of section 8111 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2014 . . .
Read more »

Three More Amicus Briefs in Support of Petitioner in Al Bahlul v. United States

By
Tuesday, August 19, 2014 at 9:31 AM

Yesterday we flagged two amicus briefs filed on behalf of the petitioner in al-Bahlul v. United States by (1) the National Institute of Military Justice and (2) Professor David Glazier of Loyola Law School. The day saw three more briefs filed on Ali al-Bahlul’s behalf, each presenting different arguments for why the D.C. Circuit should reverse al-Bahlul’s military-commission conviction for conspiracy to commit war crimes. (3) . . .
Read more »

Another Amicus Brief Filed in Support of Petitioners in al Bahlul v. United States

By
Monday, August 18, 2014 at 7:04 PM

This morning Steve summarized the amicus brief he co-authored on behalf of the National Institute of Military Justice in support of the petitioner in al Bahlul v. United States. Professor David Glazier of Loyola Law School has also just filed an amicus brief in support of petitioner, supplementing historical arguments he initially presented in an earlier . . .
Read more »

In Trouble With the Law

By
Monday, August 4, 2014 at 6:30 PM

If press accounts are correct, we will soon have the long-awaited Executive Summary of the Senate Intelligence Committee Report on the CIA detention program.  The report itself, which has not been submitted for declassification, is massive, running some 6,000 pages and including about 37,000 footnotes.  In preparing the report, the Committee and its staff apparently . . .
Read more »

David Remes on the Counsel Access Case

By
Saturday, August 2, 2014 at 6:30 PM

David Remes, an attorney representing Guantanamo detainees–and, in particular, co-counsel for the petitioner in Hatim–writes in with this comment on Friday’s ruling in that case from the D.C. Circuit: The D.C. Circuit’s decision is disappointing, but in a sense it is anticlimactic. The government effectively won the case over a year ago, when the court stayed Judge . . .
Read more »

D.C. Circuit Upholds Security Policies in Hatim v. Obama

By
Friday, August 1, 2014 at 9:06 PM

Today the D.C. Circuit handed down its decision in the “counsel access” case, upholding the constitutionality of security procedures instituted at Guantanamo in 2012 and 2013. The panel decision, written by Judge Griffith for himself, Chief Judge Garland and Judge Henderson, reverses Chief Judge Royce Lamberth’s July 11, 2013 ruling partially invalidating the procedures on the grounds that . . .
Read more »

D.C. Circuit Overturns District Court’s Invalidation of GTMO Procedures in Counsel Access Case

By
Friday, August 1, 2014 at 10:21 AM

Here is the panel’s opinion in Hatim v. Obama, which opens: GRIFFITH, Circuit Judge: Guantanamo Bay detainees challenge two new policies they claim place an undue burden on their ability to meet with their lawyers. The district court upheld the detainees’ challenge, but we reverse, concluding that the new policies are reasonable security precautions.

Hobby Lobby at Guantanamo?

By
Monday, July 7, 2014 at 9:39 AM

Have a look at this emergency motion for a temporary restraining order, filed Thursday by attorneys for Guantanamo detainee Imad Hassan. It opens: This motion seeks a temporary restraining order (TRO) prohibiting Respondents from depriving Petitioner of the right to participate in communal prayers during the Islamic holy month of Ramadan, which commenced this year on June 28. . . .
Read more »

Pre-Abu Khattala: Yunis, That 1987 Shipboard Terrorist Interrogation Case

By
Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 10:00 AM

Ahmed Abu Khattala is not the first person to be whisked onto a ship in the Middle East by U.S. forces, interrogated aboard, and then dropped in a U.S. court. There are some recent famous cases, of course, but there are also some older ones—one of which, in particular, may have precedential value for the . . .
Read more »

Global (Statutory) Habeas After Aamer

By
Wednesday, June 25, 2014 at 4:00 PM

As my co-authors and I put the finishing touches on the 2014-15 Supplement to Aspen Publishers’ National Security Law and Counterterrorism Law casebooks, I had another thought about the potential consequences of the D.C. Circuit’s February 2014 decision in Aamer v. Obama—about which I’ve blogged a fair amount previously. Recall that, in Aamer, the D.C. Circuit held that the Supreme Court’s decision . . .
Read more »

The Obviously Unconstitutional Cotton Amendment

By
Thursday, June 19, 2014 at 4:30 PM

Among the proposed amendments to the DOD appropriations bill currently under consideration in the House of Representatives is this doozy, courtesy of Arkansas Rep. Tom Cotton: None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be used to transfer or release any individual detained at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, . . .
Read more »

Allaithi v. Rumsfeld: D.C. Circuit Affirms

By
Tuesday, June 10, 2014 at 2:06 PM

A three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit handed down its decision in Allaithi v. Rumsfeld today, affirming the district court’s ruling that six detainees subjected to prolonged detention and alleged mistreatment at Guantanamo did not sufficiently allege that the officials who authorized and supervised their detention acted outside the scope of their employment. At the outset, Judge Brown (also writing . . .
Read more »

The Uncertain Future of Military Detention Authority as “Combat Operations” in Afghanistan End

By
Tuesday, May 27, 2014 at 4:23 PM

Scooping his own speech tomorrow at West Point, President Obama today announced his decision on future US force levels in Afghanistan.  Assuming that the winner of the Afghan presidential election will indeed sign the new Bilateral Security Agreement (which both leading candidates have pledged to do), the US will: – reduce its presence to 9800 . . .
Read more »

DDC Declines to Reissue TRO in Dhiab Hunger Strike Case, Blasts DoD “Intransigence”

By
Friday, May 23, 2014 at 9:11 AM

Earlier in the week, I wondered aloud about the future of a temporary restraining order, entered by Judge Gladys Kessler and temporarily banning the force feeding of Guantanamo detainee Abu Wa’el Dhiab.  The court had called a status conference on Wednesday, and there addressed various discovery issues.  But Judge Kessler pointedly did not say what . . .
Read more »

New Trial Date Set for February 2015 in Al-Nashiri

By
Thursday, May 22, 2014 at 1:30 PM

This marks the most significant among many dates set by the Second Amended Scheduling Order, in the military commission case of United States v. Al-Nashiri.  The ruling was issued on May 9 (and in response to defense requests), but only recently made its way through Guantanamo’s security morass. It remains to be seen whether this revised schedule will stick. . . .
Read more »

Read Out on Today’s GTMO Hunger Strike Hearing

By
Wednesday, May 21, 2014 at 3:08 PM

Last week, U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler entered a temporary restraining order in a habeas case filed by Guantanamo detainee Jihad Dhiab. Among other things, and most interestingly, her ruling temporarily forbade the government from engaging in “any Forcible Cell Extractions of Petitioner for purposes of enteral feeding and any enteral feeding of Petitioner until . . .
Read more »

DDC to GTMO: No Force Feeding Detainee Until Hearing

By
Friday, May 16, 2014 at 7:44 PM

That’s perhaps the most eye-catching feature of this just-issued preservation order from U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler. It reads, in pertinent part: On April 18, 2014, Petitioner Mohammed Abu Wa’el (Jihad) Dhiab filed an Application for Preliminary Injunction and an Immediate Order for Disclosure of Protocols Forthwith [Dkt. No. 203]. On May 2, 2014, the Court set a Motion . . .
Read more »