HABEAS CORPUS: THE GREAT WRIT KEVIN W. BAKER GOV. 4913-09 INDEPENDENT STUDY PROFESSOR JEFFERY ROBB, J.D. TEXAS WOMAN'S UNIVERSITY SPRING 2014 (original) (raw)

Habeas Corpus in America: The Politics of Individual Rightsby Justin J. Wert

Political Science Quarterly, 2011

might fit their model of strategic incrementalism (pp. 188-189). These limitations do little damage to the overall success of their efforts. While I believe the authorsʼ Preface oversimplifies Charles Merriamʼs call to action, Ainsworth and Hall have, in fact, succeeded in fulfilling Merriamʼs methodological aspirations for the discipline.

Calling the Government to Account: Habeas Corpus after Boumediene

In June 2008, the Supreme Court decided Boumediene v. Bush, holding that Guantanamo detainees have a right to habeas corpus under the Constitution's Suspension Clause. In the more than three years since Boumediene, lower federal courts in Washington D.C., have issued nearly eighty decisions addressing the merits of Guantanamo habeas cases. In the process, they have developed an emerging body of national security detention jurisprudence, with implications that transcend the Guantánamo habeas cases. This Article surveys this post-Boumediene jurisprudence and assesses its implications. Although it is too early to draw any definitive conclusions, the growing body of habeas decisions provides a window into Boumediene’s impact and the legacy of the post-9/11 enemy combatant decisions more generally. In particular, the Article describes the significance and limitations of what Boumediene described as a critical function of habeas: calling the government to account by requiring that it provide a lawful basis for a prisoner’s detention.

Habeas corpus in the age of Guantanamo

Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu, 2010

The purpose of the article is to examine the meaning of habeas corpus in the age of the war on terror and the detention camps at Guantanamo Bay. Since the war on terror was declared in 2001, the writ has been invoked from quarters not nor- mally considered within the federal courts’ domain. In this article, I set out to do two things: first, I provide an overview of the writ’s history in the United States, and ex- plain its connection to federalism and unlawful executive detention. I then set out to bridge the two meanings of habeas corpus. Second, then, I examine the cases that came out of Guantanamo Bay, and explain their connection to the writ’s true mean- ing. In conclusion, I find that there is no discrepancy between habeas as a tool of liberty for the guilty and for the detained.