A joint status report is expected Monday in Doe v. Mattis, in which the United States and the ACLU are locked in legal battle over the fate of an unnamed U.S.-Saudi dual citizen whom the U.S. alleges to be an enemy combatant captured in Syria. The case presents lots of interesting legal issues, many of which Bobby Chesney and Steve Vladeck have covered with their usual insight and attention to detail (available here).
Latest in Detention
The Doe v. Mattis saga has taken a significant turn, as the U.S. government continues to attempt to rid itself of the dual U.S.-Saudi citizen it has held in military custody in Iraq since last September (following his capture in Syria by the Syrian Democratic Forces): In a filing late this afternoon in the D.C.
The government has filed a notice with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in Doe v. Mattis, informing the court that phone calls between Doe and his attorneys were inadvertently recorded by the Defense Department. The department writes that the one Pentagon employee who heard the phone calls has not discussed the contents with anyone and has been instructed not to do so. The contents of the calls have been downloaded to a CD, which will be shared with the ACLU and subsequently destroyed. The filing is available in full below.
On Monday, Khalid Ahmed Qassim filed a motion for en banc review of Judge Thomas Hogan’s May 10 denial of a petition for habeas relief.
There’s plenty to chew on in the 79 pages of opinions from the D.C. Circuit in Doe v. Mattis—in which a divided panel affirmed a district court injunction blocking the transfer of a U.S. citizen captured in Syria and held in Iraq as an “enemy combatant” to “Country A” (which is likely Iraq) or “Country B” (which is definitely Saudi Arabia).
On Tuesday, Judge Thomas Hogan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia denied Khalid Ahmed Qassim’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Russell Spivak summarized the joint status report, motion in limine, and a prehearing brief filed in the case for Lawfare in March. Read Hogan’s one-page judgment below:
Revisiting the Prosecution Option in Doe v. Mattis: Is the Real Aim Here to Secure a Citizenship Waiver?
Prosecuting John Doe seemed unviable at first. Things may be different now.
What to make of the court's split decision.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has released its opinion affirming the lower court's injunction on the U.S. military's planned transfer of John Doe, a U.S. citizen held in military custody in Iraq. The court ruled on Monday, but the opinion was previously under seal.
On Monday, we learned that a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has sided with the ACLU on the question whether the U.S. government can involuntarily transfer John Doe, a dual U.S.-Saudi citizen whom U.S. forces have held as an enemy combatant in Iraq since last September.