ACLU Urges Supreme Court to Order Trial for U.S. Citizen Held as "Enemy Combatant"

February 23, 2004 12:00 am

Media Contact
125 Broad Street
18th Floor
New York, NY 10004
United States

ACLU Urges Supreme Court to Order Trial for U.S. Citizen Held as “”Enemy Combatant””

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

NEW YORK–In a friend-of-the-court brief filed with the U.S. Supreme Court today, the American Civil Liberties Union urged the Justices to reject the government’s argument that it may detain U.S. citizen Yaser Esam Hamdi in a military jail without charges or trial and without meaningful access to a lawyer.

“The scope of the government’s position is unprecedented. Arbitrary executive detention has been seen as inconsistent with the rule of law since at least the Magna Carta,” said ACLU Legal Director Steven R. Shapiro. “There simply is no legal or constitutional basis for allowing the government to detain Hamdi indefinitely based solely on the President’s unilateral decision.”

At issue is the President’s claim of authority to designate an American citizen as an “enemy combatant” and then to detain him indefinitely in a military prison without any meaningful opportunity for judicial review. Two years after his initial confinement, Hamdi has still never had a chance to present his side of the story – and never will, if the government prevails.

The ACLU brief, filed along with the American Jewish Committee, Trial Lawyers for Public Justice and the Union for Reform Judaism, argues that the President’s action has never been authorized by Congress, violates due process, and is inconsistent with the Geneva Conventions.

If the President lacks authority to designate American citizens as “enemy combatants,” Hamdi must either be released or charged with a crime, the groups said in their brief. If the President has the authority he claims, Hamdi is still entitled to meet with his lawyer in private and challenge the basis for the government’s designation. Finally, under the Geneva Conventions, even “enemy combatants” must be treated as prisoners of war, something the government has steadfastly refused to do.

Hamdi’s case will likely be argued in April with the case of Jose Padilla, which the Justices accepted for review last Friday. Those two cases, as well as a challenge to the government’s indefinite detention of foreign-born suspects held at a military prison camp in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, may bring some resolution to the civil liberties controversies swirling around the Administration’s response to 9/11. The ACLU intends to file briefs in all three cases.

Hamdi is allegedly a “battlefield detainee” who fought for the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. Northern Alliance forces in Afghanistan apprehended him during the military conflict in the fall of 2001. Hamdi was later transferred to United States military custody and then transferred, along with other prisoners, to a naval base in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. When Hamdi’s American citizenship was confirmed, he was removed from the Guantánamo Bay facility and ultimately transferred to a military brig in South Carolina where, until very recently, he was held completely incommunicado and without access to a lawyer. He has yet to be charged with any crime.

“We cannot allow the war on terrorism to become an excuse for ignoring the Constitution and our international treaty obligations,” Shapiro said. “Much more than the liberty of one individual is at stake in this case. This is a case that ultimately calls into question our commitment to the rule of law.”

The case is Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, No. 03-6696.

The ACLU brief is online at /node/36299.


Sign up to be the first to hear about how to take action.