Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 15 of 15

Full-Text Articles in Law

Suspension And The Extrajudicial Constitution, Trevor W. Morrison Nov 2007

Suspension And The Extrajudicial Constitution, Trevor W. Morrison

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

What happens when Congress suspends the writ of habeas corpus? Everyone agrees that suspending habeas makes that particular - and particularly important - judicial remedy unavailable for those detained by the government. But does suspension also affect the underlying legality of the detention? That is, in addition to making the habeas remedy unavailable, does suspension convert an otherwise unlawful detention into a lawful one? Some, including Justice Scalia in the 2004 case Hamdi v. Rumsfeld and Professor David Shapiro in an important recent article, answer yes.

This Article answers no. I previously offered that same answer in a symposium essay; …


Brief Of Salim Hamdan As Amicus Curiae, Boumediene V. Bush & Al Odah V. United States, Nos. 06-1195 & 06-1196 (U.S. Aug. 24, 2007), Neal K. Katyal Aug 2007

Brief Of Salim Hamdan As Amicus Curiae, Boumediene V. Bush & Al Odah V. United States, Nos. 06-1195 & 06-1196 (U.S. Aug. 24, 2007), Neal K. Katyal

U.S. Supreme Court Briefs

No abstract provided.


Brief Of Legal Historians As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioners, Boumediene V. Bush, Nos. 06-1195, 06-1196 (U.S. Aug. 24, 2007), James Oldham Aug 2007

Brief Of Legal Historians As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioners, Boumediene V. Bush, Nos. 06-1195, 06-1196 (U.S. Aug. 24, 2007), James Oldham

U.S. Supreme Court Briefs

No abstract provided.


Wartime Process: A Dialogue On Congressional Power To Remove Issues From The Federal Courts, John C. Yoo, Jesse Choper Jul 2007

Wartime Process: A Dialogue On Congressional Power To Remove Issues From The Federal Courts, John C. Yoo, Jesse Choper

John C Yoo

Many have long debated whether Congress may strip the federal courts completely of jurisdiction over certain classes of cases. Until the last few years, these debates met the very definition of academic. Aside from two statutes, Congress had never engaged in clear removal of cases from the Supreme Court or the lower federal courts. That changed with the Court's decision in Rasul v. Bush, which extended the federal writ of habeas corpus to alien enemy combatants detained at the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba Naval Station. In response to Rasul, Congress enacted the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 (DTA), which forbade any …


Wartime Process: A Dialogue On Congressional Power To Remove Issues From The Federal Courts, John C. Yoo, Jesse Choper Jul 2007

Wartime Process: A Dialogue On Congressional Power To Remove Issues From The Federal Courts, John C. Yoo, Jesse Choper

Jesse H Choper

Many have long debated whether Congress may strip the federal courts completely of jurisdiction over certain classes of cases. Until the last few years, these debates met the very definition of academic. Aside from two statutes, Congress had never engaged in clear removal of cases from the Supreme Court or the lower federal courts. That changed with the Court's decision in Rasul v. Bush, which extended the federal writ of habeas corpus to alien enemy combatants detained at the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba Naval Station. In response to Rasul, Congress enacted the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 (DTA), which forbade any …


The Unitary Executive, Jurisdiction Stripping, And The Hamdan Opinions: A Textualist Response To Justice Scalia, Steven G. Calabresi, Gary S. Lawson May 2007

The Unitary Executive, Jurisdiction Stripping, And The Hamdan Opinions: A Textualist Response To Justice Scalia, Steven G. Calabresi, Gary S. Lawson

Faculty Scholarship

In Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, a five to three majority of the United States Supreme Court held unlawful the Bush Administration's use of military commissions to try alien combatant detainees held at the United States airbase in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba-at least until and unless Congress enacted more specific authorization for the composition and procedures of the commissions. 1 There are many features of the Court's opinion that we find questionable: its analysis of the wartime scope of the "executive Power"2 vested in the President by Article II of the Constitution,3 its construction of the statutes that supposedly limit the President's power …


Another Hurdle To Habeas: The Streamlined Procedures Act, Michelle Hertz Mar 2007

Another Hurdle To Habeas: The Streamlined Procedures Act, Michelle Hertz

Duke Law Journal

No abstract provided.


Mostly Harmless: An Analysis Of Post-Aedpa Federal Habeas Corpus Review Of State Harmless Error Determinations, Jeffrey S. Jacobi Feb 2007

Mostly Harmless: An Analysis Of Post-Aedpa Federal Habeas Corpus Review Of State Harmless Error Determinations, Jeffrey S. Jacobi

Michigan Law Review

Sixty years ago, in Kotteakos v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that a small class of so-called harmless errors committed by courts did not require correction. The Court acknowledged that some judicial errors, though recognizable as errors, did not threaten the validity of criminal convictions and therefore did not quite require reversal. Specifically, the Court held that errors that violated federal statutes should be deemed harmless unless they had a "substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury's verdict." While Kotteakos represented the Supreme Court's first treatment of the concept of harmlessness, other courts had a …


Aedpa's Wrecks: Comity, Finality, And Federalism, Lee B. Kovarsky Jan 2007

Aedpa's Wrecks: Comity, Finality, And Federalism, Lee B. Kovarsky

Faculty Scholarship

Over the last decade, federal courts have internalized the idea that interpretations of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) should disfavor habeas relief. This Article explores the strange legislative history surrounding AEDPA's passage and the resulting problems in using 'comity, finality, and federalism' to express this interpretive mood. It demonstrates that such a simplistic reading of habeas reform is deeply misguided. Through the use of public choice and related models, the Article explores the roots of this interpretive problem. It ultimately rejects any attempt to characterize AEDPA by reference to legislative purpose.


The Process Due Indefinitely Detained Citizens, Carl W. Tobias Jan 2007

The Process Due Indefinitely Detained Citizens, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

A very controversial feature of the "war on terror" is the scope of the power which Congress has granted President George W. Bush to designate suspected terrorists enemy combatants and indefinitely detain them. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has most fully, if not clearly, resolved this question.

The United States incarcerated two citizens with little process for more than a year in the Charleston and Norfolk naval brigs. The first litigated three habeas corpus petitions before the Fourth Circuit and a fourth to the Supreme Court before the government released him. The second convinced a …


Deconstructing Hirota: Habeas Corpus, Citizenship, And Article Iii, Stephen I. Vladeck Jan 2007

Deconstructing Hirota: Habeas Corpus, Citizenship, And Article Iii, Stephen I. Vladeck

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

The jurisdiction of the federal courts to consider habeas petitions brought by detainees held as part of the “war on terrorism” has been a popular topic for courts and commentators alike. Little attention has been paid, however, to whether the Constitution itself interposes any jurisdictional limits over such petitions. In a series of recent cases, the US government has invoked the Supreme Court’s obscure (and obtuse) 1948 decision in Hirota v. MacArthur (338 US 197) for the proposition that Article III forecloses jurisdiction over any petition brought by a detainee in foreign or international custody, including that of the “Multinational …


Does "Second" Mean Second: Examining The Split Among The Circuit Courts Of Appeals In Interpreting Aedpa's "Second Or Successive" Limitations On Habeas Corpus Petitions, Mark T. Pavkov Jan 2007

Does "Second" Mean Second: Examining The Split Among The Circuit Courts Of Appeals In Interpreting Aedpa's "Second Or Successive" Limitations On Habeas Corpus Petitions, Mark T. Pavkov

Case Western Reserve Law Review

No abstract provided.


The Hamdan V. Rumsfeld Decision, Thomas F. Berndt, Josiah Ramsey Fricton, Alethea M. Huyser Jan 2007

The Hamdan V. Rumsfeld Decision, Thomas F. Berndt, Josiah Ramsey Fricton, Alethea M. Huyser

William Mitchell Law Review

No abstract provided.


The Rule Of Law And The Military Commission, Stephen J. Ellmann Jan 2007

The Rule Of Law And The Military Commission, Stephen J. Ellmann

Articles & Chapters

This essay examines the underlying foundations of the Supreme Court's decision in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld. After laying out many of the features of the conflicting positions taken by the majority and dissents in the case, the article argues that the majority's judgment was by no means determined by the plain meaning of the statutory provisions at issue, nor even by the Steel Seizure framework of overlapping zones of executive and legislative power. Instead, three factors deserve special emphasis. The first is the Court's effort to protect, and catalyze, Congressional authority. The second is the Court's understanding of its own role …


The Military Commissions Act, Habeas Corpus, And The Geneva Conventions, Curtis A. Bradley Jan 2007

The Military Commissions Act, Habeas Corpus, And The Geneva Conventions, Curtis A. Bradley

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.