Skip to content

Tag Archives: David Remes

David Remes on Guantanamo in 2013

By
Thursday, January 2, 2014 at 3:57 PM

David Remes, long-time Guantanamo habeas defense counsel, writes in with this recap of major Guantanamo developments in 2013: Summation The year saw heightened misery for the detainees, but also glimmers of hope. To protest their open-ended detention, the detainees staged a seven-month hunger strike. The prison warden broke the strike by making their lives too . . .
Read more »

A Duel of Letters in the Counsel Access Case

By
Monday, December 16, 2013 at 1:00 PM

The nearly-singular focus of last week’s oral argument in Hatim v. Obama, the counsel access case, was the intrusiveness of JTF-GTMO’s genital-area searches. That focus hasn’t at all shifted, judging by last Friday’s letter filing from the Department of Justice. Both sides have characterized the search process, and in a manner consistent with their litigating positions. At . . .
Read more »

David Remes on My Reaction to the Taliban’s Reaction to the Guantanamo Hunger Strikes

By
Wednesday, March 13, 2013 at 6:08 AM

Habeas lawyer David Remes, who represents Guantanano detainees, writes in with the following comment on the Guantanamo hunger strikes, and Steve’s, my and the Taliban’s response to them: Several days ago, Steve Vladeck noted the release of a letter by the Center for Constitutional Rights and individual habeas attorneys calling attention to the mass hunger strike by detainees at Guantanamo and . . .
Read more »

David Remes on a Human Rights Agenda for the Obama Second Term

By
Friday, November 9, 2012 at 9:40 PM

David Remes, who represents several Yemeni detainees at Guantanamo Bay, writes in response to my comments this morning on Eric Lewis’s New York Times column: Ben chides Eric Lewis for setting goals Ben thinks “ain’t gonna happen.” Ben says “it would be interesting to see a more realistic effort at a human rights agenda for Obama’s second . . .
Read more »

Is the NDAA Vague or Overbroad?

By
Wednesday, September 19, 2012 at 4:51 PM

The other day, in response to Raha Wala’s comments on Hedges, I promised to address the First Amendment question at the heart of Judge Forrest’s ruling—a promise that seems to have excited David Remes. Steve Vladeck, however, beat me to the punch in giving a detailed analysis of the matter, so this post will be . . .
Read more »

David Remes on Hedges

By
Saturday, September 15, 2012 at 8:53 AM

David Remes—who, in addition to representing several Guantanamo detainees, is a member of the plaintiffs’ legal team in Hedges v. Obama—sent in this note yesterday: The debate on this blog about Judge Forrest’s decision has focused almost entirely on her treatment of the NDAA/AUMF issue and related procedural questions. I encourage readers to savor the judge’s . . .
Read more »

Sabin Willett and David Remes on Adnan Latif

By
Wednesday, September 12, 2012 at 9:30 PM

I will offer my own thoughts on the death of Adnan Latif later on, but several people have sent me comments on the subject that I am going to post first. Rather than do this in a string posts, I’m going to consolidate two in this one post. David Remes, one of Latif’s lawyers, sent . . .
Read more »

Statement of Latif Legal Team

By
Wednesday, September 12, 2012 at 6:58 AM

The legal team for Adnan Latif, the detainee who died at Guantanamo over the weekend, has issued this statement: STATEMENT OF LAWYERS REPRESENTING ADNAN FARHAN ABDUL LATIF September 11, 2012 Adnan Latif’s death in U.S. custody at Guantanamo is a tragedy. It could have been avoided. Adnan spent more than ten years in Guantanamo—nearly a . . .
Read more »

Breaking News: Dead Guantanamo Detainee Is Adnan Latif

By
Tuesday, September 11, 2012 at 12:22 PM

At least, that’s what I’m hearing. Yes, this is the same Latif whose case riled the D.C. Circuit and has caused much discussion on this site. This is going to be a big deal. Stay tuned. UPDATE: Here is SouthCom’s press release: MIAMI — Joint Task Force Guantanamo released the identity of the detainee who . . .
Read more »

David Remes on His Latest Trip to GTMO

By
Sunday, August 26, 2012 at 9:34 AM

David Remes, who represents several Yemeni clients at Guantanamo Bay, writes in with the following reflections on his latest trip to Guantanamo: David Remes’ Latest GTMO Adventures I returned from GTMO on Thursday, unexpectedly soon. I had flown down on Monday for an extended visit, but the visit was cut short when I and others . . .
Read more »

David Remes’ Overview of the GTMO Counsel Access Dispute

By
Thursday, August 16, 2012 at 1:47 PM

David Remes, an attorney for Guantanamo habeas petitioners Uthman and Esmail, has sent in this overview of the ongoing Guantanamo counsel access dispute. In brief: Remes and others recently objected to the Department of Justice’s proposed “Memorandum of Understanding,” or “MOU” – which would, among other things, regulate future meetings between Remes and his two clients, . . .
Read more »

Hedges Argument Account from the Village Voice

By
Thursday, August 9, 2012 at 7:33 AM

I am on vacation, and blogging only minimally, so I missed this week’s hearing before Judge Katherine Forrest on the plaintiff’s request for a permanent injunction in Hedges. Seeing as how the argument took place in New York, I probably would have missed it anyway. There hasn’t been much press on the hearing–at least not . . .
Read more »

Government’s Response On GTMO Counsel Access

By
Thursday, July 26, 2012 at 2:45 PM

Apparently prompted by David Remes’ motion regarding GTMO counsel access issues in Esmail [h/t Josh Gerstein at Politico], the government now has filed its own motion. I’ve only glanced at the new filing, but it seems the government wants a single district judge to decide the counsel access question, with that judge’s ruling to govern . . .
Read more »

I’m Not Going to Make Fun of this New York Times Editorial

By
Monday, July 23, 2012 at 7:27 AM

I’m just going to link to it. There’s some rhetoric I wouldn’t use in here, but–as I said before and as Steve explained here–this is a provocative step the government has taken, and it shouldn’t do things like this and not expect at least a bit of backlash. The editorial, entitled “A Spiteful New Policy at . . .
Read more »

Habeas, Res Judicata, and Why the New Guantanamo MOU Is a Big Deal

By
Tuesday, July 17, 2012 at 5:13 PM

Ben already posted last week about the new battle a-brewing over the “Memorandum of Understanding” (MOU) that the Department of Justice is apparently requiring counsel in the Guantanamo habeas cases to sign in order to continue meeting with their clients in cases in which the government has prevailed on the merits and no further appeal . . .
Read more »

“Any Unauthorized Disclosure”

By
Thursday, July 12, 2012 at 3:14 PM

There seem to be many things habeas counsel might dislike about the proposed Memorandum of Understanding that DOJ has asked David Remes to sign.  But like Ben, I’ll wait until I see the government’s response to David’s motion regarding the MOU before I form any views.     In the meantime, though, here’s one current events-y detail that caught my eye.   Text . . .
Read more »

A New Battle Over GTMO Attorney Access

By
Wednesday, July 11, 2012 at 4:22 PM

I received the following email from human rights lawyer David Remes about a filing he and his colleagues just made on Monday on behalf of his Guantanamo client Yasein Khasem Mohammad Esmail. Esmail lost his habeas case, and according to the filing, the government is now taking the position that he can no longer meet with . . .
Read more »

One More Thought on the Definition of “Prevail”

By
Monday, June 25, 2012 at 10:08 PM

Just a quick follow-up on my post of this morning. A correspondent points out to me that on David Remes’s definition of “prevailing,” Boumediene itself should be counted as a government win. After all, the Supreme Court in that case only remanded the matter, without actually granting habeas relief to the petitioners. That, of course, . . .
Read more »

Thoughts on David Remes’s Definition of “Prevailing”–and of 19

By
Monday, June 25, 2012 at 7:38 AM

In his response to my earlier post on the New York Times’s 19-to-0 figure–which turns out, he says, to be his 19-to-0 figure–David Remes makes several interesting points worthy of comment. I wish to focus on two here. I will spare the reader a rehash of the underlying facts, as they are all spelled out . . .
Read more »

David Remes Responds to My Habeas Numbers

By
Saturday, June 23, 2012 at 10:51 AM

Habeas lawyer David Remes writes in to defend the New York Times‘s use of 19-to-0 as the government’s win-loss record before the D.C. Circuit in habeas cases. He makes, to be honest, a better case than I thought was possible–though one I still disagree with. I will offer a few further thoughts on this subject . . .
Read more »