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
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
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 … Read more »
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
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 … Read more »
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
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 … Read more »
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
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 … Read more »
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 … Read more »
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 … Read more »
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 … Read more »
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 … Read more »
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 … Read more »
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 … Read more »
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 … Read more »
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 … Read more »
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 … Read more »
David Remes writes in with the following observation:
Yesterday, Ben questioned the propriety of Harold Koh’s reference to “enemies of the state” at a State Department event marking the thirty-fifth anniversary of the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor.
The other day, David Rivkin and Cully Stimson had this oped in the Washington Post on the recently-passed Virginia law that seeks to prohibit state cooperation with detentions of American citizens under the NDAA. This produced an interesting exchange between … Read more »
Counsel for Guantanamo habeas petitioners Uthman, Almerfedi, and Latif–all of whom have cert petitions pending or imminent–have asked the Supreme Court to hold off on deciding whether to grant until the petitions can be considered in concert. In … Read more »
Stepping out of his persona as a Guantanamo habeas lawyer, David Remes writes in with the following comments in response to my recent post on fears that Al Qaeda of the Arabian Peninsula is working on refining ricin:
Last Saturday,
Habeas laywer David Remes writes in with the following thoughts on Ramadan at Guantanamo:
In her story on Ramadan fasting in Guantanamo, which you blogged about on August 6, Carol Rosenberg quoted Navy Commander Tamsen Reese, a public affairs officer,
Habeas lawyer David Remes writes in with the following comments on the transfer provisions of both the House and Senate NDAA language:
From my standpoint as a Guantánamo habeas lawyer, the detainee transfer provisions of H.R. 2219 (§ 8124) and
Back in April, I posted this motion by habeas attorney David Remes in Paracha v. Obama, asking for the ability to access Wikileaked material like everyone else can. I had not noticed this response yesterday from the government until … Read more »
Habeas lawyer David Remes sent in the following comments on recent developments in D.C. Circuit case law. He emphasizes that he has been counsel in several of the cases discussed below and that the following represents his own opinion only:… Read more »
…that every non-government employee in the world can discuss what the Wikileaked documents say about Guantanamo detainees except their own habeas counsel–who remain gagged as a consequence of their obligation to “protect” classified information that is all over the Internet. … Read more »
Habeas lawyer David Remes just sent in the following:
Whatever their significance may be in other respects, the Wikileaks documents have little significance for the detainees still at Guantanamo, because few if any of them will be transferred in the
Habeas lawyer David Remes sent me the following the other night from Guantanamo. I am not sure what to say about it, so I pass it on without comment:
Being in Guantanamo, visiting clients who understand they’ll spend the rest
Habeas lawyer David Remes writes with the following comments in response to my post yesterday objecting to the Scalise Amendment:
You’re right that Congress shouldn’t bar Ambassador Dan Fried and his staff from resettling or repatriating Guantanamo detainees. I do,
The responses to my “Embrace Guantanamo” post from Sabin Willett, David Remes, and Gabor Rona have a common argumentative thread that strikes me as warranting a response. Not that it’s wrong, exactly, but the reader might … Read more »
Habeas lawyer David Remes sent me yesterday the following comments on my earlier post suggesting that it’s time for President Obama to embrace Guantanamo. I want to draw attention very briefly to two aspects of his note. First, it … Read more »
Habeas lawyer David Remes sent in the following thoughts about the Supreme Court’s denial of certiorari in Al Adahi today–about which I commented here:
That the Court did not grant review is a disappointment to those of us who
Today the Department of Defense announced that Farhi Saeed bin Mohammed, a Guantanamo detainee, was transferred back to his native Algeria. According to the DoD press release, the United States “coordinated with the Government of Algeria to ensure the transfer … Read more »
I received the following note today from Guantanamo lawyer David Remes in response to my post from Friday on recidivism:
Ben raises important questions in his “Thinking about Recidivism” post, but to put the discussion in context, I must point
Gabor Rona of Human Rights First sent me yesterday the following thoughts on Linda Moreno’s earlier comments concerning military commissions from a defense perspective:
“How is my client best served?” is what Linda Moreno, a criminal defense lawyer, says about
A few days ago, in response to comments by David Remes, I asked for thoughts from criminal defense lawyers as to whether they would rather defend a terrorist case in federal court or in a a military commission. Yesterday, Linda … Read more »
Responding to my earlier post objecting to CCR’s statement on the Ghaliani verdict, David Remes–one of the key Guantanamo habeas lawyers–wrote me a very interesting letter. It is interesting, in my view, less for its defense of CCR’s statement … Read more »
Habeas lawyer David Remes sent in the following in response to my response to Gabor Rona–who in turn was responding to this post. I am going to let David have the last word here:
Ben’s response to Gabor
It isn’t every day that someone sends me a 5,700 word critique of, well, my own work and asks me to publish it. But today, David Remes, who represents a number of Guantanamo clients, sent me a document entitled “Why … Read more »
Tuesday, May 21, 2013
William P. Barr (former Attorney General), Jamie S. Gorelick (former Deputy AG), and Kenneth L. Wainstein (former Assistant AG for National Security) have this Times op-ed on the AP subpoena controversy. They write:
While neither we nor the critics know the circumstances behind the prosecutors’ decision to issue this subpoena, we do know from the government’s public disclosures that the prosecutors were right to investigate this leak
