Yesterday, in a short per curiam opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit affirmed the ruling of the U.S.
Latest in Guantanamo: Litigation: D.C. Circuit
On Friday, a three-judge panel in the D.C. Court of Appeals rejected a request to release recordings of military personnel in Guantanamo Bay force-feeding a detainee who was on a hunger strike. The detainee in question is Abu Wa’el (Jihad) Dhiab, whose habeas corpus proceedings have previously been covered by Lawfare. Dhiab has since been released to Uruguay, but media organizations continue to press for the public release of the military’s force-feeding recordings.
Counsel for Ali Hamza Suliman al Bahlul have filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court appealing the October 2016 ruling by the U.S. Circuit Court of the District of Columbia sitting en banc.
Counsel for Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri in the Guantanamo detainee's habeas case have filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court appealing the decision made by the U.S. Court of Appeals last August, which denied Nashiri's petition for a writ of mandamus to dissolve the military commission convened to try him. The declassified petition and and appendix contain new information on Nashiri's treatment while in CIA custody and are both available below.
With the end of the Obama administration and the beginning of the Trump administration, activity has picked up in Guantanamo litigation regarding the SSCI "torture report." Several weeks ago, I flagged that in the Nashiri habeas case in the U.S.
As Benjamin Wittes and I noted a few weeks ago, these past few weeks have produced some interesting litigation activity regarding the Senate Intelligence Committee’s interrogation report. In the last days of the Obama administration and the first few days of the Trump administration, things appear to have picked up even more.
Unless you're someone who keeps a copy of Hart & Wechsler on your desk, you probably don't care that much about Tuesday's divided ruling by the D.C. Circuit in In re Al-Nashiri (which, for ease of reference, we should call "Al-Nashiri II," to distinguish it from the D.C. Circuit's February ruling on different matters in "Al-Nashiri I").
Anyone following the Guantánamo military commissions would do well to read Bob Loeb and Helen Klein's trenchant take on last Friday's D.C. Circuit decision in In re Khadr, in which the Court of Appeals declined to issue a writ of mandamus even while agreeing that there may be a serious question "whether the civilians who serve as judges on the U.S.
Here it is. Judge Brett Kavanaugh's opinion for himself, Judge Thomas Griffith, and Senior Judge A. Raymond Randolph opens as follows:
Omar Ahmed Khadr was a member of al Qaeda. On July 27, 2002, at the age of 15, 2 Khadr took part in a firefight in Afghanistan against U.S. forces. During the battle, Khadr killed a U.S. Army soldier, Sergeant First Class Christopher Speer.
What was already shaping up to be a busy (and important) few months for the D.C. Circuit vis-a-vis the Guantánamo military commissions just got a little busier.