Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
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.
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.
Rumsfeld v. Padilla , 542 U.S. 426 (2004), was a United States Supreme Court case, in which José Padilla , an American citizen, sought habeas corpus relief against Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld , as a result of his detention by the military as an " unlawful combatant ."
Case name Citation Date decided Elk Grove Unified School Dist. v. Newdow: 542 U.S. 1: 2004: Norton v. S. Utah Wilderness Alliance: 542 U.S. 55: 2004: United States v.
On February 20, 2004, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the government's appeal. The Supreme Court heard the case, Rumsfeld v. Padilla, in April 2004, but on June 28, 2004, the court dismissed the petition on technical grounds because It was improperly filed in federal court in New York instead of South Carolina, where Padilla was being detained.
Donald Rumsfield, former Secretary of Defense from 1975 to 1977, and again from 2001 to 2006 amid the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, died Wednesday, according to a statement from his ...
Yaser Esam Hamdi (born September 26, 1980) is a former American citizen who was captured in Afghanistan in 2001. The United States government claims that he was fighting with the Taliban against U.S. and Afghan Northern Alliance forces.
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]