Wiki Law School will soon be moving! Please update your bookmarks. Our future address is www.wikilawschool.org |
Hamdi v. Rumsfeld: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
(Created page with "{{Infobox Case Brief |court=U.S. Supreme Court |citation=542 US 507 (2004) |date=June 28, 2004 |subject=Constitutional Law |appealed_from=U.S. Court of Appeals, 4th Circuit |c...") |
No edit summary |
||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
|appealed_from=U.S. Court of Appeals, 4th Circuit | |appealed_from=U.S. Court of Appeals, 4th Circuit | ||
|case_treatment=No | |case_treatment=No | ||
|facts=A U.S. citizen was captured in Afghanistan and found to be part of al Qaeda. | |facts=A U.S. citizen was captured in Afghanistan and found to be part of al Qaeda. | ||
|issues=Whether the Executive has the authority to detain citizens who qualify as enemy combatants. | |issues=Whether the Executive has the authority to detain citizens who qualify as enemy combatants. | ||
|holding=Yes and no. A citizen held in the United States as an enemy combatant is guaranteed by Fifth Amendment [[Constitution_of_the_United_States#Due_process|due process]] the right to contest that detention before a neutral decision-maker. | |||
|holding=Yes and no. A citizen held in the United States as an enemy combatant is guaranteed by Fifth Amendment due process the right to contest that detention before a neutral | |||
|rule=The Executive authority to detain individuals who are classified as enemy combatants are still afforded Due Process. | |rule=The Executive authority to detain individuals who are classified as enemy combatants are still afforded Due Process. | ||
|case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | |case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | ||
|link=https://www.oyez.org/cases/2003/03-6696 | |link=https://www.oyez.org/cases/2003/03-6696 | ||
Line 43: | Line 29: | ||
|opinion_type=dissent | |opinion_type=dissent | ||
|written_by=Clarence Thomas | |written_by=Clarence Thomas | ||
}} | }} | ||
}} | }} |
Revision as of 21:54, November 30, 2022
Hamdi v. Rumsfeld | |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
---|---|
Citation | 542 US 507 (2004) |
Date decided | June 28, 2004 |
Appealed from | U.S. Court of Appeals, 4th Circuit |
Case Opinions | |
plurality | written by Sandra Day O'Connor joined by William H. Rehnquist, Anthony M. Kennedy, Stephen G. Breyer |
concur/dissent | written by David H. Souter joined by Ruth Bader Ginsburg |
dissent | written by Antonin Scalia joined by John Paul Stevens |
dissent | written by Clarence Thomas |
Facts
A U.S. citizen was captured in Afghanistan and found to be part of al Qaeda.
Issues
Whether the Executive has the authority to detain citizens who qualify as enemy combatants.
Holding
Yes and no. A citizen held in the United States as an enemy combatant is guaranteed by Fifth Amendment due process the right to contest that detention before a neutral decision-maker.
Rule
The Executive authority to detain individuals who are classified as enemy combatants are still afforded Due Process.