Talk:Guantanamo detainees' appeals in Washington, D.C., courts

"Legal term of art"?
The term "Detainee" is used as the legal term of art by the United States to describe individuals held at GITMO.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/detainees.htmlYachtsman1 (talk) 01:35, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


 * What in the name of heck is a "legal term of art"?


 * The link you have supplied does not support your claim. It does not use the term "legal term of art".  Geo Swan (talk) 00:43, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

A term of art is a precise word or phrase used by professionals in a certain subject area.

http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/tutorials/definitions/term_art.html

The expression "Legal Term of Art," therefore, means a term used by attorneys in certain areas. Thus, for example, the term "reliance" is used to express actions taken based on an "assurance" in a "contract." Reliance is not stated as "this thing I did because some guy promised me he would pay me if I did X."

The term "Detainee" fits into this category, as it defines a group of individuals who are presently being incarcerated in GITMO. They are afforded protections under the Detainee Protection Act of 2005:

http://www.milnet.com/House/HR-6166-Military%20Commisions%20Act%20of%202006/Detainee%20Treatment%20Act%20of%202005.html

The choice of verbage is not happenstance. The persons who fall under this category meet a very special definition under the law. They are not "prisoners," because they are not American Citizens, nor are the Prisoner of War. Their status is, instead, as "detainees" of the Department of Defense. Thus, they are under military detention, not afforded the status of military prisoners of war under the Geneva Convention as irregular combatants, and the term applies solely to persons meeting this definition as a class.

I can only hope this fully, and completely, explains the legal term of art "Detainee."Yachtsman1 (talk) 23:56, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

explanation
I reverted a series of edits, made with edit summaries that seemed misleading to me. The series of edits introduces many inaccuracies. Details to follow. Geo Swan (talk) 21:47, 17 May 2010 (UTC)


 * this edit introduced inaccurate wording. Over one hundred captives had DTA appeals initiated.  This edit implied there was only one DTA appeal, for the dozen captives currently listed in the article.
 * This edit removes wikilinks to captives' ID numbers. I've explained to the contributor who removed these links why I consider these wikilinks both useful and defensible.  They did not choose to offer a response to my arguments.
 * This edit, this edit, this edit, this edit, this edit, this edit and this edit change the spelling of the captives' names from that used in the actual references their entry cites to the spelling used by the NYTimes. The contributor who made this change places far too much confidence in the NYTimes.  They have repeatedly claimed, or implied, without any actual substantiation, that the NYTimes choice of names was made with consultation with scholars in the languages the Captives were named in. Geo Swan (talk) 22:26, 17 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Regarding the first bullet point. The editor did a lot of improvement to the article. I think it would be better to improve on other editors contribution instead of stupides reverting.


 * Regarding the second bullet point. Your statement is absolute wrong:Talk:List_of_Guantanamo_Bay_detainees_accused_of_possessing_Casio_watches, Talk:Mazari_Sharif_prison.


 * Regarding the third bullet point. I strongly suggest to change it back to the individuals name to avoid confusion. The New York Times is one of the most reliable source on earth. I suggest you stop calling the New York Times unreliable, alternative i suggest you start a discussion at WP:RSN as calling the New York Time unreliable is a bit far off. IQinn (talk) 02:26, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Guantanamo detainees' appeals in Washington, D.C. courts. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081106202128/http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/circuit-court-dta-process-is-probably-dead/ to http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/circuit-court-dta-process-is-probably-dead/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 13:20, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Guantanamo detainees' appeals in Washington, D.C. courts. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5YnPfHvAa to http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/23/AR2008062300844.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 09:37, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on Guantanamo detainees' appeals in Washington, D.C. courts. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/23/AR2008062300844.html
 * Added tag to https://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gUxng-zkl2uhqdCATFQyY9_8QV3QD95JRBH00
 * Replaced archive link http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Fjurist.law.pitt.edu%2Fpaperchase%2F2008%2F11%2Fdc-circuit-suspends-status-review-for.php&date=2008-11-07 with http://www.webcitation.org/5c9gMfpOE?url=http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/11/dc-circuit-suspends-status-review-for.php on http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/11/dc-circuit-suspends-status-review-for.php
 * Replaced archive link http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2Fwp%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2008%2F11%2Fbasardh-ruling-ca-11-4-08.pdf&date=2008-11-07 with http://www.webcitation.org/5c9jUlWlp?url=http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/basardh-ruling-ca-11-4-08.pdf on http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/basardh-ruling-ca-11-4-08.pdf
 * Replaced archive link http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotusblog.com%2Fwp%2Fcircuit-court-dta-process-is-probably-dead%2F&date=2008-11-07 with https://web.archive.org/web/20081106202128/http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/circuit-court-dta-process-is-probably-dead/ on http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/circuit-court-dta-process-is-probably-dead/
 * Replaced archive link http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdocs.justia.com%2Fcases%2Ffederal%2Fdistrict-courts%2Fdistrict-of-columbia%2Fdcdce%2F1%3A2008mc00442%2F131990%2F102%2F0.pdf&date=2008-08-19 with http://www.webcitation.org/5aFWV69fA?url=http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2008mc00442/131990/102/0.pdf on http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2008mc00442/131990/102/0.pdf
 * Replaced archive link http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdocs.justia.com%2Fcases%2Ffederal%2Fdistrict-courts%2Fdistrict-of-columbia%2Fdcdce%2F1%3A2008mc00442%2F131990%2F149%2F0.pdf&date=2008-11-11 with http://www.webcitation.org/5cGD6Ogrn?url=http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2008mc00442/131990/149/0.pdf on http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2008mc00442/131990/149/0.pdf
 * Replaced archive link http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdocs.justia.com%2Fcases%2Ffederal%2Fdistrict-courts%2Fdistrict-of-columbia%2Fdcdce%2F1%3A2008mc00442%2F131990%2F95%2F0.pdf&date=2008-08-22 with http://www.webcitation.org/5aHAeUHEo?url=http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2008mc00442/131990/95/0.pdf on http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2008mc00442/131990/95/0.pdf
 * Replaced archive link http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdocs.justia.com%2Fcases%2Ffederal%2Fdistrict-courts%2Fdistrict-of-columbia%2Fdcdce%2F1%3A2008mc00442%2F131990%2F99%2F0.pdf&date=2008-08-19 with http://www.webcitation.org/5aFo5Jwvg?url=http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2008mc00442/131990/99/0.pdf on http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2008mc00442/131990/99/0.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/commentary-and-analysis/new-developments-on-detainees/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/government-to-seek-bismullah-rehearing/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/new-filings/us-mounts-sweeping-challenge-to-circuit-court/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/government-duty-in-detainee-cases-narrowed/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:35, 25 March 2017 (UTC)