`(2) any other action against the United States or its agents relating to any aspect of the detention by the Department of Defense of an alien at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, who--
`(A) is currently in military custody; or
`(B) has been determined by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in accordance with the procedures set forth in section 1005(e) of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant.'.
Detainee Treatment Act of 2005
The Bush administration argued in federal court that the Detainee Treatment Act does not apply to Guantanamo Bay. The Supreme Court already ruled in Rasul v. Bush that detainees can take their cases to court.
The District Court has jurisdiction to hear petitioners’ habeas challenges under 28 U. S. C. §2241, which authorizes district courts, “within their respective jurisdictions,” to entertain habeas applications by persons claiming to be held “in custody in violation of the . . . laws . . . of the United States,” §§2241(a), (c)(3). Such jurisdiction extends to aliens held in a territory over which the United States exercises plenary and exclusive jurisdiction, but not “ultimate sovereignty.”
Tom Malinowski believes that the DTA limits the legal challenges detainees can make. The law states that habeas corpus can be filed for "any aspect of the detention." That language is very broad.
You don't have to be a lawyer to understand the Bush Justice Department has no case. Conservatives supporting this stupidity should look up the word monarchy.
1 : undivided rule or absolute sovereignty by a single person
2 : a nation or state having a monarchical government
3 : a government having an hereditary chief of state with life tenure and powers varying from nominal to absolute
Hat tip to Americblog.
No comments:
Post a Comment