U.S. Supreme Court issues Opinions in Padilla, Hamdi and Guantanamo Bay Cases

June 28, 2004

Jonathan Freiman, local attorney representing Jose Padilla, available for comment.

Re Rumsfeld v. Padilla
"The Supreme Court today avoided the central issue in the case - whether the government can lock up an American citizen indefinitely without charge. Instead, it decided that the case had been filed in the wrong place and will need to be refiled in South Carolina. We will refile it there promptly, and trust that the federal courts will act quickly to decide the fate of a man who has sat in solitary confinement for two years despite never being charged with a crime."

Click here for the Padilla opinion.

Re Hamdi and Guantanamo Bay cases:
"The Supreme Court today dealt a one-two punch to the Bush Administration's most aggressive legal tactics in the war on terror. In the case of Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, the Court held that an American citizen - even one allegedly picked up on a foreign battlefield - always has the right to a lawyer and to a day in court. In the Guantanamo Bay cases, the Court held that non-citizens held outside the United States by U.S. forces must have the right to complain to a court that they were mistakenly captured. In both cases, the Court has essentially said that the President may not elbow courts and judges out of the war on terror, that in this war, as in prior wars, the President's actions are constrained by law."

Click here for the Hamdi opinion.

Click here for the Rasul (Guantanamo) opinion.

Click here for padillaWD.com