Habeas Corpus?
Habeas Corpus?
American National Government POL
With the war on terrorism, many different issues have come up with what is constitutional and what
is not constitutional in regards to detainees at Guantanamo Bay. Guantanamo Bay is a detention
facility that is in Cuba. It holds the prisoners of war on terrorism. President Bush chose this location
hoping to have it out of the United States judicial area. In doing this he was hoping to detain them with
out the right of habeas corpus. He was maybe hoping to detain suspects and then have them forgotten
about, and detained for life. This of course is just my theory, and I have not read any information
confirming this. Is it lawful to detain them and suspend habeas corpus? Do they get tried in a civilian
court or in a military court? Because they are not military personnel, and they are not exactly civilians,
where do they belong? Is it lawful to hold them indefinitely with out due process? Many questions
such as these have arisen. Many of the detainees brought forth to the Supreme Court cases that plea for
habeas corpus. How would you decide if habeas corpus applies? Hopefully this paper will answer
some of these questions and explain what it all means.
Let 's start by defining what Habeas Corpus is. Levin-Waldman states that habeas corpus is “a
demand by a court to a jailer to produce the prisoner and announce the the charges” (Levin-Waldman,
2012). Through out American history detainees have petitioned the courts for habeas corpus, most of
which have been denied. President Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus during the Civil War.
One prisoner of war, John Marryman, who according to Captain Aaron Jackson was “a southern
sympathizer suspected of “plotting to blow up the rail line between Baltimore and Washington, D.C. At
a time when
American National Government POL
With the war on terrorism, many different issues have come up with what is constitutional and what
is not constitutional in regards to detainees at Guantanamo Bay. Guantanamo Bay is a detention
facility that is in Cuba. It holds the prisoners of war on terrorism. President Bush chose this location
hoping to have it out of the United States judicial area. In doing this he was hoping to detain them with
out the right of habeas corpus. He was maybe hoping to detain suspects and then have them forgotten
about, and detained for life. This of course is just my theory, and I have not read any information
confirming this. Is it lawful to detain them and suspend habeas corpus? Do they get tried in a civilian
court or in a military court? Because they are not military personnel, and they are not exactly civilians,
where do they belong? Is it lawful to hold them indefinitely with out due process? Many questions
such as these have arisen. Many of the detainees brought forth to the Supreme Court cases that plea for
habeas corpus. How would you decide if habeas corpus applies? Hopefully this paper will answer
some of these questions and explain what it all means.
Let 's start by defining what Habeas Corpus is. Levin-Waldman states that habeas corpus is “a
demand by a court to a jailer to produce the prisoner and announce the the charges” (Levin-Waldman,
2012). Through out American history detainees have petitioned the courts for habeas corpus, most of
which have been denied. President Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus during the Civil War.
One prisoner of war, John Marryman, who according to Captain Aaron Jackson was “a southern
sympathizer suspected of “plotting to blow up the rail line between Baltimore and Washington, D.C. At
a time when
References: Ahuja, J. K., & Tutt, A. (2012). Evidentiary Rules Governing Guantánamo Habeas Petitions: Their Effects and Consequences. Yale Law & Policy Review, 31(1), 185-226. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=8&sid=3b5f0663-69b6-4a35-8885- 993538c27208%40sessionmgr110&hid=119 CLEANING UP "THE MESS": THE D.C. CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS AND THE BURDEN OF PROOF IN THE GUANTANAMO HABEAS CASES. (2013). Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, 36(2), 873-914. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=15&sid=3b5f0663-69b6-4a35-8885- 993538c27208%40sessionmgr110&hid=119 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW -- GUANTÁNAMO HABEAS -- D.C. CIRCUIT HOLDS THAT GOVERNMENT INTELLIGENCE REPORTS ARE ENTITLED TO A PRESUMPTION OF REGULARITY. -- Latif v. Obama, 666 F.3d 746 (D.C. Cir. 2011). (2012). Harvard Law Review, 125(8), 2193-2200. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer? vid=15&sid=3b5f0663-69b6-4a35-8885-993538c27208%40sessionmgr110&hid=119 Jackson, A (2010). Habeas Corpus in the Global War on Terror: An American Drama. Air Force Law Review. 65, 263-288. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy- library.ashford.edu/ehost/detail?vid=3&sid=8845ef06-9c29-4ee8-854b-b727ce74f2b8%40sessionmgr112&hid=123&bdata=JkF1dGhUeXBlPWlwLGNwaWQmY3VzdGlkPXM4ODU2ODk3JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=aph&AN=49259080 Levin-Waldman, O. (2012). American Government. Retrieved from https://content.ashford.edu/books/AUPOL201.12.1/sections/front_matter Olson, L. M. (2010). GUANTÁNAMO HABEAS REVIEW: ARE THE D.C. DISTRICT COURT 'S DECISIONS CONSISTENT WITH IHL INTERNMENT STANDARDS?. Case Western Reserve Journal Of International Law, 42(1/2), 197-243. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=6&sid=4477dc21-f9b7-4aaa-91fc- d993bf0549eb%40sessionmgr113&hid=124