Anti-Terror Cases with Civil Liberties Implications
Combatant Status Review Tribunals
- ABD AL AZIZ SAYER UWAIN
- ADIL ZAMIL ABDULL MOHSSIN AL ZAMIL
- FERROZ ABBASI
- MAMDOUH HABIB
- MOAZZAM BEGG
- MURAT KURNAZ
- RICHARD BELMAR
- SAIFULLAH PARACHA
For more information on the CSRTs see Human
Rights First
An
extensive list of Amici Curiae Briefs filed on behalf of the detainees
Guantanamo
Timeline (Updated May 2007)
Detainees
held at Guantanamo: list released May 15, 2006
News articles
- Detainee Deal Comes With Contradictions
- Supreme Court Expands Review of Terror Cases
- U.S. Seeks to Avoid Detainee Ruling (Washington Post, January 13 2006)
- Washington Post's series on the Supreme Court
- al-Marri third enemy combatant, briefs and materials, see Human Rights First
- Supreme
Court Rejects Guantanamo War Crimes Trials
(June 29, 2006)Decision in HAMDAN v. RUMSFELD that declared the President's plans to try Guantanamo detainees in Military Tribunals unconstitutional. - Judge
Leon Decision
(Jan 15 2005) Federal District Court decision that claims that while the Supreme Court gave detainees the right to file habeas petitions, U.S. courts had neither the right nor the obligation to consider them. - Judge
Green Decision
(Jan 31 2005) In an opposing decision on a case similar to the one brought before Leon, Hens Green ruled that the detainees had habeas rights and that the CSRTS were unconstitutional.
Domestic Surveillance
- CCR v. Bush (PDF)
- ACLU v. NSA (PDF)
- CCR Attorneys Urge Court To Release Evidence Of AT&T Role In NSA Spying
- G.O.P. Reaches Tentative Deal on Domestic Spying Legislation
- GOP Leaders Back Bush on Wiretapping, Tribunals
- "There Are No Hereditary Kings in America" - Judge Rules NSA Warrantless Spy Program Unconstitutional
Guantánamo Bay Detention Center
- BOUMEDIENE,
et al. v. BUSH, et al. and AL ODAH v. UNITED STATES, et al.
Supreme Court ruling (on two consolidated cases) in which the Court held that detainees at Guantánamo Bay have the habeas corpus rights and may challenge their detentions in federal courts. The ruling overturned the Military Commissions Act of 2006.
- HAMDAN
v. RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE et al.
Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the President's military commissions were not expressly authorized by any Congressional act. Even if they were, the Court held that the commissions were in conflict with both the UCMJ and the Geneva Conventions. The Court ruled the military commissions unconstitutional and set down basic requirements for future commissions.
- RUMSFELD,
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE v. PADILLA et al.
Supreme Court case in which Padilla, a US citizen, sought Habeas relief as a result of his detainment as an enemy combatant. Court did not decide on the issue, but remanded the case for dismissal without prejudice due to a filing error.
-
HAMDI et al. v. RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, et al.Supreme Court case holding that US citizens designated as enemy combatants have a right to challenge their detainment under the Due Process Clause.
-
RASUL et al. v. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, et al.Supreme Court decision that Guantanamo is not outside of US territory, therefore petitioners, both US citizens and non- US citizens have habeas righ
USA PATRIOT Act
- Material Support: January 2004, see Washington Times article
- National Security Letters: September 2004, see Washington Post article
- DOE
v. GONZALEZ
Federal court decision that declared National Security Letters, NSLs, unconstitutional and in specific violation of the First Amendment right to free speech and the Fourth amendment protection from unreasonable searches.
Other Post-9/11 Cases
- FindLaw's database on terrorism-related cases
- Overlooking Innocence: Refashioning of the Material Witness Law (includes a discussion of Oregon Attorney Brandon Mayfield's detention)
- Department of Justice Report from the Field: The USA PATRIOT Act at Work