Argument Against Padilla
Padilla was arrested and held under a material witness warrant at the airport. He was arrested on suspicion of plotting to detonate a dirty bomb in the Unites States but he was never charged in relation to these suspicions. Before the ruling on the validity of holding Padilla under the material witness warrant was issued, President George Bush made an order to detain Padilla as an enemy combatant. The president’s order was justified by public law 107-40, which authorizes the detention of an American citizen designated as an enemy combatant. Padilla’s detention as an enemy combatant was because he was closely associated with al Qaeda, which was at war with the U.S. He had also engaged in war like activities such as preparing for acts of terrorism.
…show more content…
The government filled a motion to dismiss this application on the arguments that Padilla’s lawyer could not file and sign the petitioner on his behalf because the lawyer was not proper next friend required in such applications. The government also argued that the respondent was the commander of the navy brig where Padilla was being held and not the Secretary of defense as indicated in the application. In addition, the government contended that the court lacked jurisdiction over the respondent who resided in another …show more content…
After the trial, Padilla was convicted of conspiracy to murder, kidnap and maim people and providing material support to terrorist. His indictment avoided an impending issue before the Supreme Court of how long the government could hold a citizen without a charge. Padilla and the two other codefendants denied the charges against them. The prosecution alleged that Padilla had traveled to Afghanistan to train with the al-Qaeda and his fingerprints had been found al Qaeda application form. In his defense Padilla argued that he had travelled to Egypt to study. The government said that he had met with a senior commander of the AL Qaeda where he was asked to go to a place where he could learn to make a dirty bomb. He was sentenced to 17 years and four months. He appealed against the decision but the court of appeal upheld the lower court’s decision. Subsequently the court of Appeals ruled that the sentence was too lenient and sent the case back to the lower court. The district court then sentenced him to 21
The government filled a motion to dismiss this application on the arguments that Padilla’s lawyer could not file and sign the petitioner on his behalf because the lawyer was not proper next friend required in such applications. The government also argued that the respondent was the commander of the navy brig where Padilla was being held and not the Secretary of defense as indicated in the application. In addition, the government contended that the court lacked jurisdiction over the respondent who resided in another …show more content…
After the trial, Padilla was convicted of conspiracy to murder, kidnap and maim people and providing material support to terrorist. His indictment avoided an impending issue before the Supreme Court of how long the government could hold a citizen without a charge. Padilla and the two other codefendants denied the charges against them. The prosecution alleged that Padilla had traveled to Afghanistan to train with the al-Qaeda and his fingerprints had been found al Qaeda application form. In his defense Padilla argued that he had travelled to Egypt to study. The government said that he had met with a senior commander of the AL Qaeda where he was asked to go to a place where he could learn to make a dirty bomb. He was sentenced to 17 years and four months. He appealed against the decision but the court of appeal upheld the lower court’s decision. Subsequently the court of Appeals ruled that the sentence was too lenient and sent the case back to the lower court. The district court then sentenced him to 21