Main Page | Recent changes | View source | Page history

Printable version | Disclaimers | Privacy policy

Not logged in
Log in | Help

Hamdan v. Rumsfeld

From dKosopedia

Hamdan v. Rumsfeld is a legal case challenging the Bush administration's right to set up a detention camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

By a vote of 5-3, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that neither Congress's post-9/11 Authorization for the Use of Military Force, nor the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), nor the inherent powers of the President gave the President the authority to establish military tribunals on Guantanamo Bay to try and convict alleged enemy combatants in the war on terror. The Court found the commissions illegal under both military justice law and the Geneva Convention.

Justice Stevens wrote the majority opinion, supported in its entirety by Justices Breyer, Ginsburg and Souter. Justice Kennedy concurred separately. Justices Alito, Scalia and Thomas all dissented, and Chief Justice Roberts excused himself from the case because he had ruled on it previously (in favor of the administration) while he was at the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The military attorney who defended Hamdan, Lt. Col. Charles Swift, was denied promotion and forced to retire from the Navy. (Source: Hamdan Lawyer Forced Out of Navy).

External Links

Retrieved from "http://localhost../../../h/a/m/Hamdan_v._Rumsfeld_6f22.html"

This page was last modified 00:37, 9 October 2006 by dKosopedia user Corncam. Content is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License.

[Main Page]
Daily Kos
DailyKos FAQ

View source
Discuss this page
Page history
What links here
Related changes

Special pages
Bug reports