Kiyemba+v.+Obama+(new+page)

As far as the Executive component of the issue these are a few articles, somewhat older, however I feel that they show the progressive standing of the President and the Supreme Court over time.

[]

[]

Peter

In terms of pervious court decisions, the appointed lawyers are really relying on the Rascul vs. Bush decision which was decided in 2002. This "challenged the U.S government's practice of holding foreign nationals captured in connection with its war on Arghanistan and al-Qaida in indefinite detention,without counsel and without the right to a trial or to know the charges against them". Based on these grounds, the Supreme court agreed to hear the cases of the Uighur detainees, this was all of course in objection to what the current administration favored. The detainees were then granted to petiton with writ of habeus corpus which essentially "is a judicial mandate in which a person petitions that they were imprisoned unlawfully and that they object to their own detention or imprisonment". Next there was the Boumedienne vs. Bush which recognized that guantanamo prisoners have a constitutional right to challenge their detention through habeas corpus in U.S. federal courts, and that "Congress' attempt to strip them of that right and create an inadequate for habeas was unconstitutional". The courts then went on to rule in Parhat vs. Gates.- Ashley Mohan 2/23

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2009/0523/p06s01-woeu.html/(page)/2 -info on the few sent to albania http://www.lectlaw.com/def/h001.htm- definition of habeas explained

[|Updates] in the Kiyemba V. Obama case. I think this section of the article sums up the different points we've discussed in class, the main one being that the Obama administration would like to see this case dissipate quietly - "In the new letter briefs, the Justice Department repeated its primary preference that the case be dismissed — leaving intact its victory in the D.C. Circuit Court limiting judges’ power to order detainee transfers — and the Uighurs’ lawyers repeated their argument that the Court should go ahead and decide the case, overturn the Circuit Court, and then return the case to the District Court for another review." A major issue in this case is an attempt to arrange what ultimately happens to detainees who are innocent yet submerged in the Guantanamo process, the Uighur lawyers argue that the Supreme Court's ruling of //Boumediene v. Bush// has yet to be applied to not only the Uighur case but scores of others. Posted by Christian 2/22.

International coverage of Spain's offer to take five of the detainees http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2010/02/201021515278672731.html

SCOTUS Wiki Great overview of the whole case http://www.scotuswiki.com/index.php?title=Kiyemba_v._Obama

PETER-->The district court decision http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200902/08-5424-1165428.pdf

Turns out that the Supreme Court will not be hearing the Uigher case, the changed circumstances of the case, which includes the resettlement of the Guantanamo prisoners in other countries, concludes that the Judges ultimately agree with the Obama administration that the challenge proferred up by the D.C. district court is not material sutiable for the Court's consideration. The Supreme Court with this statement - also over ruled the District of Columbia decision that the Judicial branch had no power to release those deemed enemy combatants onto American soil. The case seemed pre-destined to address the issue of seperation of powers, with this decision it appears as if the //Boumediene v. Bush// precedent means very little? Coverage in the [|Washington Post] and the [|New York Times]. Posted by Christian 3/3.