Extrajudicial detention, U.S., George W. Bush Administration: Difference between revisions
imported>Howard C. Berkowitz (New page: *Bybee memo to Gonzales *Authorization for the Use of Military Force *Supreme Court **Hamdi v. Rumsfeld **Hamdan v. Rumsfeld **Rumsfeld v. Padilla *Legislation **[[Detaine...) |
imported>Howard C. Berkowitz No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{TOC-right}} | |||
{{seealso|User: Howard C. Berkowitz/EJUS}} | |||
Most of the justification for [[extrajudicial detention]] and other unusual legal measures following the [[9-11 attacks]], by the [[George W. Bush Administration]], derive authority from an interpretation on the Constitutional power of the President as Commander-in-Chief, and from the 2001 [[Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF)]], as distinct from a [[declaration of war]].<ref name=AUMF>{{citation | |||
|title = Joint Resolution: Authorization for Use of Military Force | |||
| date = September 18, 2001 | |||
| id = Public Law 107-40 [S. J. RES. 23] | |||
| url = http://news.findlaw.com/wp/docs/terrorism/sjres23.es.html}}</ref> It authorizes the President "to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons." | |||
Congress declared this was a statutory authorization consistent with the [[War Powers Resolution]], although not superceding any of its other requirements. There has been little argument that this authorized combat operations in the [[Afghanistan War (2001-)]], although the authorization has been less clear both for the [[Iraq War]]. It, and legal opinions, also form the Administration's justification for a wide range of actions dealing with individuals and groups considered part of what it terms the [[war on terror]]. | |||
A number of the authorities claimed have been repudiated by the [[Obama administration]] when it succeeded the Bush Administration, in January 2009. | |||
==Authority claimed== | |||
Besides direct military operations, President [[George W. Bush]] held that the AUMF permitted him to declare anyone, regardless of citizenship, an [[enemy combatant]]. The first key legal opinion supporting this position , dated August 1, 2002, was issued by Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee, in the the Office of Legal Counsel of the [[U.S. Department of Justice]] went to White House Counsel [[Alberto Gonzales]]. <ref name=Bybee>{{citation | |||
| title = Memorandum for Alberto R, Gonzales, Counsel to the President, Re: Standards of conduct for interrogation under 18 USC [United States Code sections] 2340-2340A | |||
| author = Jay Bybee, Office of the Legal Counsel, U.S. Department of Justice | |||
| url = http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/cheney/torture_memo_aug2002.pdf | |||
}}</ref> | |||
See [[Rumsfeld v. Padilla]]. | |||
*Bybee memo to Gonzales | *Bybee memo to Gonzales | ||
*Supreme Court | *Supreme Court | ||
**[[Hamdi v. Rumsfeld]] | **[[Hamdi v. Rumsfeld]] | ||
Line 9: | Line 28: | ||
**[[Detainee Treatment Act]] | **[[Detainee Treatment Act]] | ||
**[[Military Commissions Act]] | **[[Military Commissions Act]] | ||
==Significant cases== | |||
There have been an interesting set of combinations involving the citizenship of individuals detained, where they were apprehended, who detained them, and where they were subsequently detained. A basic first look shows some of the initial combinations: | |||
{| class="wikitable" | |||
!Date | |||
!Citizenship | |||
!Place of capture | |||
!Captured by | |||
!Detained by | |||
!Person(s) and cases | |||
!Comments | |||
|- | |||
|2002 | |||
|U.S. | |||
|U.S. | |||
|U.S. FBI | |||
|U.S. military in U.S. | |||
|[[Jose Padilla]], ''[[Rumsfeld v. Padilla]]'' | |||
|[[SCOTUS]] ordered trial | |||
|- | |||
|2004 | |||
|U.S. | |||
|Aghanistan | |||
|U.S. Troops | |||
|U.S. troops (Bagram?) | |||
|Hamdi ''[[Hamdi v. Rumsfeld]]'' | |||
|[[SCOTUS]] ordered trial | |||
|- | |||
|2006 | |||
|Yememi citizen | |||
|Aghanistan | |||
|Afghan troops, turned over to U.S. | |||
|U.S. troops | |||
|''[[Hamdan v. Rumsfeld]]'' | |||
|[[SCOTUS]] ordered trial | |||
|- | |||
} | |||
==References== | |||
{{reflist|2}} |
Revision as of 10:19, 7 March 2009
- See also: User: Howard C. Berkowitz/EJUS
Most of the justification for extrajudicial detention and other unusual legal measures following the 9-11 attacks, by the George W. Bush Administration, derive authority from an interpretation on the Constitutional power of the President as Commander-in-Chief, and from the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF), as distinct from a declaration of war.[1] It authorizes the President "to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons."
Congress declared this was a statutory authorization consistent with the War Powers Resolution, although not superceding any of its other requirements. There has been little argument that this authorized combat operations in the Afghanistan War (2001-), although the authorization has been less clear both for the Iraq War. It, and legal opinions, also form the Administration's justification for a wide range of actions dealing with individuals and groups considered part of what it terms the war on terror.
A number of the authorities claimed have been repudiated by the Obama administration when it succeeded the Bush Administration, in January 2009.
Authority claimed
Besides direct military operations, President George W. Bush held that the AUMF permitted him to declare anyone, regardless of citizenship, an enemy combatant. The first key legal opinion supporting this position , dated August 1, 2002, was issued by Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee, in the the Office of Legal Counsel of the U.S. Department of Justice went to White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales. [2]
See Rumsfeld v. Padilla.
- Bybee memo to Gonzales
- Supreme Court
- Legislation
Significant cases
There have been an interesting set of combinations involving the citizenship of individuals detained, where they were apprehended, who detained them, and where they were subsequently detained. A basic first look shows some of the initial combinations:
}References
- ↑ Joint Resolution: Authorization for Use of Military Force, September 18, 2001, Public Law 107-40 [S. J. RES. 23]
- ↑ Jay Bybee, Office of the Legal Counsel, U.S. Department of Justice, Memorandum for Alberto R, Gonzales, Counsel to the President, Re: Standards of conduct for interrogation under 18 USC [United States Code sections 2340-2340A]
Date | Citizenship | Place of capture | Captured by | Detained by | Person(s) and cases | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2002 | U.S. | U.S. | U.S. FBI | U.S. military in U.S. | Jose Padilla, Rumsfeld v. Padilla | SCOTUS ordered trial |
2004 | U.S. | Aghanistan | U.S. Troops | U.S. troops (Bagram?) | Hamdi Hamdi v. Rumsfeld | SCOTUS ordered trial |
2006 | Yememi citizen | Aghanistan | Afghan troops, turned over to U.S. | U.S. troops | Hamdan v. Rumsfeld | SCOTUS ordered trial |