enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Hamdi v. Rumsfeld - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamdi_v._Rumsfeld

    Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507 (2004), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court recognized the power of the U.S. government to detain enemy combatants, including U.S. citizens, but ruled that detainees who are U.S. citizens must have the rights of due process, and the ability to challenge their enemy combatant status before an impartial authority.

  3. List of landmark court decisions in the United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_landmark_court...

    Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507 (2004) The federal government has the power to detain those it designates as enemy combatants, including United States citizens, but detainees that are United States citizens must have the rights of due process and the ability to challenge their enemy combatant status before an impartial authority. Hamdan v.

  4. Hamdan v. Rumsfeld - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamdan_v._Rumsfeld

    Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U.S. 557 (2006), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that military commissions set up by the Bush administration to try detainees at Guantanamo Bay violated both the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and the Geneva Conventions ratified by the U.S. [1]

  5. Military tribunals in the United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_tribunals_in_the...

    Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507 (2004), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court recognized the power of the U.S. government to detain enemy combatants, including U.S. citizens, but ruled that detainees who are U.S. citizens must have the rights of due process, and the ability to challenge their enemy combatant status before an ...

  6. Habeas corpus petitions of Guantanamo Bay detainees

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_corpus_petitions_of...

    On 28 June 2004, the Supreme Court decided against the Government in Rasul v. Bush. [5] Justice John Paul Stevens, writing for a five-justice majority, held that the detainees had a statutory right to petition federal courts for habeas review. [6] That same day, the Supreme Court ruled against the Government in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld. [7]

  7. Hedges Amicus Brief FINAL - HuffPost

    images.huffingtonpost.com/2013-02-01-ThreeAmigos...

    Nos. 12-3176, 12-3644 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT CHRISTOPHER HEDGES, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. BARACK OBAMA, individually and as

  8. Combatant Status Review Tribunal - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combatant_Status_Review...

    The CSRTs were established July 7, 2004 by order of U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz [4] after U.S. Supreme Court rulings in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld [5] and Rasul v. Bush [6] and were coordinated through the Office for the Administrative Review of the Detention of Enemy Combatants.

  9. New Orleans attack: Suspect's travel to Egypt under investigation

    www.aol.com/orleans-attack-latest-fbi-dhs...

    The suspect in the truck attack that killed 14 and injured dozens in New Orleans on New Year's had traveled to Egypt in 2023 for about a month, his half-brother told ABC News. Shamsud-Din Jabbar ...