User:Ace2650/sandbox

= Habeas Corpus Restoration Act of 2007 =

I. Lead Section
Under President George W. Bush, congress passed the Military Commissions Act (2006). The official purpose of this act is “to authorize trial by military commission or violations of the law of war, and for other purposes”. The Act allows detainees to be legally held with no charges. This act undermines habeas corpus and fundamentals of the United States Constitution by allowing the president to be both the judge and jury and does not require typical court proceedings to determine guilt. This act also allows the president to determine the definition of torture. This act also strips anyone deemed an “enemy combatant” the right to challenge their detention.

Rasul v. Bush (2004)
During America’s War on Terror, twelve Kuwaitis and two Australians were taken into United States custody in Pakistan or Afghanistan. They were transported to the United States military base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. After their detainment was made known, their families filed for a writ of habeas corpus claiming that they were being held unconstitutionally on the basis of the Fifth Amendment. The United States argued that their courts had no jurisdiction to hear these cases because none of them were American citizens. They added that they were not being detained where the United States held this freedom because Cuba held ultimate sovereignty. In a 6-3 Supreme Court decision, they decided the United States did have jurisdiction over foreign citizens. The justices defended this by arguing they were held by the United States, were at a United States military base, and the amount of control the United States held over Guantanamo Bay was sufficient to hold jurisdiction. A significant portion of this case was that it highlighted the right to habeas corpus did not lie in citizenship. Their detainment was deemed unconstitutional and they were released.

Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006)
Ahmed Hamdan is a Yemenese citizen who served as the personal driver of Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden during farming project in Afghanistan. The project was used to increase al-Qaeda support in the region. After the United States invasion in 2001, the military worked with Afghani bounty hunters who captured Hamdan and sold him to the U.S... By 2002, Hamdan was moved to a military detainee camp at Guantanamo Bay and was charged with conspiracy to commit terrorism. As he was going to be tried before a military commission was designed, which would have been the protocol for any terrorist suspect. Hamdan quickly filed a writ of habeas corpus, claiming his detention as unlawful. In a 5-3 supreme court ruling, they sided with Hamdan and ruled that the Bush administration’s attempt to try him as an “enemy combatant” violated his rights set out in the U.S. Code of Military Justice.

Boumediene v Bush (2008)
In 2002 Lakhdar Boumediene and five Algerians were detained after being suspected of conspiring to attack the U.S. embassy in Bosnia. They were deemed enemy combatants and detained at Guantanamo Bay. Boumediene filed for a writ of habeas corpus claiming violations of due process, common law, international law, and various U.S. statutes and treaties. The District Court dismissed all of his claims as the Military Commissions Act forbids that the habeas statute does not extend to aliens held at Guantanamo. By 2006 when they refiled, the Military Commissions Act had been enacted. They argued that the MCA was unconstitutional under the Suspension Clause, which states “The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion of the public safety”. The court ruled in favor of the government as the MCA claims it applies to “all cases, without exception”. In a rebuttal, the detainees argued that the clauses written in the 1700s should be interpreted in the context that they were written, and this would not include covering instances where aliens were detained overseas on non-U.S. land leased by the United States. The Supreme Court ruled 5-3 in Boumediene's favor, dismissing his case and agreed that the MCA was unconstitutional.

VI. References
“Boumediene v. Bush.” Oyez, 10 Apr. 2019, www.oyez.org/cases/2007/06-1195.

McBride, Alex. “The Supreme Court. The Future of the Court. Landmark Cases. Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006) | PBS.” THIRTEEN, Dec. 2006,  www.thirteen.org/wnet/supremecourt/future/landmark_hamdan.html.

“Military Commissions Act of 2006.” American Civil Liberties Union, www.aclu.org/other/military-commissions-act-2006.

“Rasul v. Bush.” Oyez, www.oyez.org/cases/2003/03-334. Accessed 22 Apr. 2019.