Analysis: The Privilege Of The Writ Of Habeas Corpus
The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus
POL 201 American National Government
Instructor: Professor D B
Aug 12, 2013
The Right of Habeas Corpus is derived from the Latin meaning “you have the body.” The meaning according to the U.S. Constitution is the right of any person to question their incarceration before a judge. The detainees of war are entitled to habeas corpus because the authorized use of military force does not activate the Suspension Clause, holding them indefinitely is a violation of the Due Process Clause, and it is undetermined whether the detainees are prisoners of war or citizens suspected of treason. As citizens of the United States we must consider if it is legal for the …show more content…
This suspension was so vague as to allow local authorities to arbitrarily arrest any person they considered to be disloyal or whose politics they merely disliked. Some of the individuals that where detain had done nothing more than complain about Lincoln. It was estimated that ten to fifth teen thousand people were detain and denied a prompt trial. Ignoring the Habeas Corpus Act, which limited the time an individual could be held without trial, which removed one of the most contentious aspects of the …show more content…
This did not stop the detainees from filing habeas corpus submissions over the next three years. In landmark ruling, 2004 the Supreme Court heard the first of these cases Rasul v. Bush. The court’s found that the American legal system had authority to decide whether foreign “enemy combatants” were being wrongfully detained. The Defense Department documented Combatant Status Review Tribunals—nonpublic hearings that determined whether detainees met the conditions needed to satisfy the designation of “enemy combatant.” The tribunals came under a lot of criticism for not fulfilling the requirements. In October 2006 in order to gain control over the growing criticism of the Guantanamo detainees, Bush signed the U.S. Military Commissions Act (MCA). Congress stated they plan to allow trial by military commission for violations of the law of war and for other purposes. The MCA explicitly abolished habeas corpus rights for noncitizens. But in the case Boumediene v. Bush President of the United States (2008) challenged the MCA by appealing to a clause in the Constitution which stated the right to challenge “The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus
POL 201 American National Government
Instructor: Professor D B
Aug 12, 2013
The Right of Habeas Corpus is derived from the Latin meaning “you have the body.” The meaning according to the U.S. Constitution is the right of any person to question their incarceration before a judge. The detainees of war are entitled to habeas corpus because the authorized use of military force does not activate the Suspension Clause, holding them indefinitely is a violation of the Due Process Clause, and it is undetermined whether the detainees are prisoners of war or citizens suspected of treason. As citizens of the United States we must consider if it is legal for the …show more content…
This suspension was so vague as to allow local authorities to arbitrarily arrest any person they considered to be disloyal or whose politics they merely disliked. Some of the individuals that where detain had done nothing more than complain about Lincoln. It was estimated that ten to fifth teen thousand people were detain and denied a prompt trial. Ignoring the Habeas Corpus Act, which limited the time an individual could be held without trial, which removed one of the most contentious aspects of the …show more content…
This did not stop the detainees from filing habeas corpus submissions over the next three years. In landmark ruling, 2004 the Supreme Court heard the first of these cases Rasul v. Bush. The court’s found that the American legal system had authority to decide whether foreign “enemy combatants” were being wrongfully detained. The Defense Department documented Combatant Status Review Tribunals—nonpublic hearings that determined whether detainees met the conditions needed to satisfy the designation of “enemy combatant.” The tribunals came under a lot of criticism for not fulfilling the requirements. In October 2006 in order to gain control over the growing criticism of the Guantanamo detainees, Bush signed the U.S. Military Commissions Act (MCA). Congress stated they plan to allow trial by military commission for violations of the law of war and for other purposes. The MCA explicitly abolished habeas corpus rights for noncitizens. But in the case Boumediene v. Bush President of the United States (2008) challenged the MCA by appealing to a clause in the Constitution which stated the right to challenge “The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus