Habeas Case Quietly Heads to Supreme Court

[kpete]

Habeas Case Quietly Heads to Supreme Court
Little Watched Dispute Could Define Scope of Judicial Review in Tribunal Cases

By Aziz Huq 02/10/2008 186 Views
Illustration by: Matt Mahurin


This week, the solicitor general will file an appeal in the U.S. Supreme Court on a little-watched case from Guantánamo. But this case demands attention because it presents in stark relief the two key questions of the government’s extraterritorial detentions: Has the government been lying when it claims to have detained a hard core of Al Qaeda and the Taliban at Guantánamo? Can the government suborn the judiciary into covering this up?

Until now, all eyes have been on a case called Boumedienne v. Bush, argued before the Supreme Court on Dec. 5, 2007. In Boumedienne, the court heard the Guantánamo detainees’ challenge to recent legislation that stripped them of the historical right of habeas corpus—which allows them to challenge their detention in federal court.

Despite the fanfare, a majority of justices have already signaled that the “Great Writ”—as habeas is known—does, in fact, extend to Guantánamo. The real question is: what happens next.

Under longstanding doctrine, Congress is permitted to remove habeas jurisdiction as long as it provides an “adequate” substitute. In the December hearing, the court’s swing vote, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, indicated his interest in probing whether there was an “adequate substitute.”

more at:
http://www.washingtonindependent.com/view/solicitor-general-to

[pleah]

1. K&R People aren't paying attention. Too wrapped up in the election.

Thanks for keeping it out there.

[Solly Mack]

2. K&R

Thanks!!!

[snappyturtle]

3. K&R Thanks for posting this. I've been wondering what the status

of 'habeas' is. I also keep hoping to hear the presidential candidates speak about it's future and restoration. I could well be wrong but I believe the only candidate I heard speak of it is now gone...Kucinich. I worry when I don't hear the candidates talking about the unitary executive and the implications to the citizenery. A more interesting question for us might be, "Why"? Do the candidates want to retain the powers the president has assumed? Dangerous in my book.

[Elspeth]

4. THANK YOU FOR THIS POST

:kick:

[williesgirl]

5. K&R

[scarletwoman]

6. Thanks kpete -- you always find the most salient and important stuff to post!

k&r

:yourock:
sw

[bigbrother05]

7. K and r

Thanks