Skip to content

Category Archives: Terrorism Trials

Terrorism Trials

9/11 Defense Counsel on the FBI’s Contacts with Defense Team Members

By
Tuesday, April 15, 2014 at 9:29 AM

Defense lawyers for 9/11 accused Ammar al-Baluchi had this to say yesterday, about an emergency defense filing in the 9/11 case concerning alleged FBI contacts with a member of another accused’s defense team: GUANTANAMO BAY, CUBA Today, defense attorneys in the 9/11 military commission revealed that the FBI had interrogated a Defense Security Officer, and . . .
Read more »

9/11 Case Motions Hearing: April 15 Session

By
Tuesday, April 15, 2014 at 8:48 AM

Tax day is upon us; so is day two in a four-day, pre-trial motions hearing in United States v. Mohammed et al.  (You can find coverage of yesterday’s quite brief open session here.) As always, Lawfare will file mini-updates on the hearing throughout the day, in our “Events Coverage” section—and link to those updates here. 4/15 Session #1: . . .
Read more »

9/11 Case Motions Hearing: April 14 Session

By
Monday, April 14, 2014 at 8:43 AM

Today marks the beginning of a four-day hearing in the 9/11 case, a.k.a. United States v. Mohammed et al.   Lawfare will cover the session, with almost-live updates from a Closed Circuit TV viewing facility located at Maryland’s Fort Meade. Throughout the day, we’ll publish each post over at our Events Coverage page, and link to them below.  We expect the . . .
Read more »

Statement of the Chief Prosecutor on This Week’s Hearing in the 9/11 Case

By
Sunday, April 13, 2014 at 9:19 PM

You’ll find it here. And that’s as good a reminder as any that, tomorrow, Lawfare will resume coverage of pretrial motions hearings in United States v. Mohammed et. al.  This week’s four-day session will feature (among other things) litigation over the competence of accused 9/11 co-conspirator Ramzi Binalshibh to take part in the proceedings. In his written remarks, . . .
Read more »

Toward a Coherent Theory of the “Military Exception” to Article III

By
Wednesday, April 2, 2014 at 3:45 PM

My very first Lawfare post, back in December 2011, focused on the messy constitutional question raised by United States v. Ali—a case then pending before the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces that raised the constitutionality of subjecting civilian military contractors to military, rather than civilian, trials. Although they raise different questions, I was . . .
Read more »

The Terrorism Trial Debate and Abu Ghaith

By
Friday, March 28, 2014 at 11:16 AM

In yesterday’s New York Times, Ben Weiser reported that Abu Ghaith’s case has renewed the “debate” over civilian terrorism trials. To my ear, this sounds a bit like today’s debates over New Coke, or the Dukakis Campaign. I haven’t had much to say about Abu Ghaith’s prosecution, because whole thing struck me as straightforward and . . .
Read more »

Habeas and the Military Commissions After Aamer

By
Friday, March 21, 2014 at 9:36 AM

I’ve already written at some length about the D.C. Circuit’s decision last month in Aamer v. Obama, in which a divided panel held that the Guantánamo detainees may challenge the conditions of their confinement through habeas petitions, notwithstanding the language of the jurisdiction-stripping provisions of the Military Commissions Act of 2006. As Judge Tatel explained, . . .
Read more »

Statement of Chief Prosecutor on Pre-Trial Motions in Al-Nashiri Case

By
Wednesday, February 26, 2014 at 4:04 PM

The chief prosecutor in United States v. Al-Nashiri, Brig. Gen. Mark Martins, spoke at Guantanamo Bay today on the many pre-trial motions in the case. The introduction is below and you can view the full statement after the break. CHIEF PROSECUTOR MARK MARTINS REMARKS AT GUANTANAMO BAY 26 FEBRUARY 2014 Twenty-one years ago today, at this hour, . . .
Read more »

A Partial Answer to My Question

By
Tuesday, February 25, 2014 at 9:44 PM

The estimable Benjamin Weiser of the excellent New York Times news staff wrote me this afternoon response to my post earlier today about the government’s motion for pseudononymous testimony in the Sulaiman Abu Gayth case. I had reported that: Judge Kaplan, in a handwritten notation, appears to have rejected the motion two days later. He writes: “Motion . . .
Read more »

Al-Nashiri Motions Hearing Postscript

By
Tuesday, February 25, 2014 at 7:58 PM

Remember how I said Lawfare would return tomorrow, to cover further proceedings in the commission case of United States v. Al-Nashiri?  Well, we won’t be doing so after all; it turns out today’s closed session marked the last meeting of this pre-trial hearing. Motions hearings will resume in late April.

Al-Nashiri Case Motions Hearing: February 25 Session

By
Tuesday, February 25, 2014 at 8:47 AM

Pre-trial proceedings continue today down at Guantanamo—but on a closed basis.  Lawfare thus won’t be there, but will pick up with coverage of the military commission case of United States v. Al-Nashiri tomorrow.

Government Seeks Testimony Under Pseudonym in Abu Gayth Case

By
Tuesday, February 25, 2014 at 6:30 AM

Speaking of the Sulaiman Abu Gayth case in Judge Lewis Kaplan’s courtroom in New York, check out this briefing. The government appears to have sought testimony under a pseudonym from a confidential witness—and been rebuffed by Judge Kaplan. The government’s motion was filed on January 31 and asked for the following: an Order (1) directing that . . .
Read more »

The Motion that Provoked the Access-to-KSM Order

By
Tuesday, February 25, 2014 at 5:25 AM

For those interested in that order the other day by Judge Lewis Kaplan’s giving defendant Sulaiman Abu Gayth access to KSM, here’s the motion that led to it.

Al-Nashiri Case Motions Hearing: February 24 Session

By
Monday, February 24, 2014 at 2:51 PM

After Saturday’s closed hearing and a Sunday recess, the military commission for United States v. Al-Nashiri is back in business today to work through numerous pre-trial motions at Guantanamo. As Wells mentioned earlier, we couldn’t get someone to Ft. Meade to provide live commentary on the proceedings, but I will be digging through today’s transcripts to provide . . .
Read more »

Al-Nashiri Motions Hearing, 2/24 Session: A Slight Adjustment in Coverage

By
Monday, February 24, 2014 at 7:25 AM

Today, Lawfare test-drives a slight adjustment to its military commissions coverage—one we previewed a while back. Jury duty will keep yours truly away from Fort Meade, and thus from almost-live blogging on the day’s events in United States from Al-Nashiri.  But that doesn’t mean we won’t cover the pre-trial motions session, which last met on Friday; instead it . . .
Read more »

Al-Nashiri Case Motions Hearing: February 21 Session

By
Friday, February 21, 2014 at 8:45 AM

A dense fog has descended over the Nation’s “Preeminent Center for Information, Intelligence, and Cyber.”  Lawfare returns to Ft. Meade today, to view pre-trial hearings in the military commission case of United States v. Al-Nashiri.  The proceedings are ongoing, of course, at Guantanamo—but zapped up to Ft. Meade, via closed-eircuit television. The fun begins at 0900.  Throughout . . .
Read more »

Al-Darbi Plea Documents

By
Thursday, February 20, 2014 at 2:35 PM

The documents were released earlier today, and all relate to the Guantanamo detainee’s entry, this morning, of a guilty plea.   There are four in all: an Offer for Pretrial Agreement; Appendix A to that Agreement; a Stipulation of Fact, containing the specific allegations which Al-Darbi accepted; and, finally, a Joint Motion regarding instructions to panel members, . . .
Read more »

Al-Darbi Arraignment Hearing

By
Thursday, February 20, 2014 at 9:10 AM

Lawfare returns to Fort Meade’s storied CCTV outpost, this time for arraignment in the Guantanamo military commission case of United States v. Ahmed Mohammed Ahmed Haza al Darbi.  Along with the usual arraignment procedures, the gathered press expect announcement of a plea deal, whereby Mr. Al-Darbi, a Saudi, would receive a reduced sentence in exchange for assisting prosecutors . . .
Read more »

2/19 Motions Session #5: Things Limburg, Part One

By
Wednesday, February 19, 2014 at 4:40 PM

It’s boat time.  Recall that Al-Nashiri is charged with playing a role in the attack on the M/V Limburg, a French-flagged oil tanker, in Yemen; the episode resulted in the death of a Bulgarian national, among other things. The vessel is the subject of our next two motions.  In the first one, argues Al-Nashiri attorney CDR . . .
Read more »

Al-Nashiri Motions Hearing: February 19 Session

By
Wednesday, February 19, 2014 at 4:20 PM

Your correspondent returns to the Fort Meade CCTV outpost, to take in almost-live broadcasts of the day’s hearing in United States v. Al-Nashiri.  A little after 0900, we learn the answer to an important question, one left hanging on Monday: whether Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri wants Rick Kammen, his civilian death penalty lawyer, to withdraw from the . . .
Read more »