Boumediene v. Bush Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Boumediene v. Bush - Case Study Example On June 12, 2002, it was ruled by the United States Supreme Court that protection of the United States Constitution was to be provided to the Guantanamo detainees. On November 20 2008, the court ruled that to allow enemy competency to be taken lightly would be inconsistent with the Court’s obligation: the court will grant their petitions and order their release. It was a unique case, and if there were any others, they would be factually alike. Nobody should be got into a false sense and that all of the cases would look like that one. Analysis The Boumediene v. Bush was made in the United States in a civilian court due to Lakhdar Boumedeine at the time he was held captive by the United States in Cuba, at the Guantanamo Bay detention camps. The habeas petition Al Odah v. United States was merged with the case and challenged the authenticity of the detention of Boumedeine at the military base of the United States Naval Station in Guantanamo Bay, together with the Military Commiss ions Act of 2006. The Supreme Court heard the legal arguments on the combined case on December 5th 2007. Lakhdar Boumediene in early January 2002 was held in custody in the United States Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. ... The first habeas case was brought in February 2002 by the Center for Constitutional Rights and counsel on behalf of detainees held at Guantanamo. It had been argued initially by the Bush Administration that the detainees were in a territory with no right of accessing the federal courts. Therefore, they could not challenge whether they had been detained lawfully. Later on, Congress tried to throw out the decision with a series of laws after the United States Supreme Court ruled that the persons in habeas cases could go forward under the federal habeas statute. The laws brought out by congress included the Detainee Treatment Act (2005) and the Military Commissions Act 2006 that made the federal laws to get rid of habeas jurisdiction for any foreigner held in the U.S custody. Amendments made a much more narrowed survey proceeding in the Court of Appeals as a substitute for habeas review for the Columbia District. This was for individuals to test the military’s categorization of t hem as the enemy combatants. The Center for Constitutional Rights argued that the DTA process fell short of habeas and could not be corrected due to violations that occurred during the CSRT at Guantanamo (Transnational Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC), 2007). Taking the extraterritorial application of the constitution to Guantanamo in consideration, the Court adopted a practical approach that it has applied in first cases. Since Guantanamo was outside the sovereign territory of the United States, the constitution did not apply and thus the Court strongly criticized the President and the Congress’ attempt to declare that. In the 2008 U.S. Supreme Court decision which stated that