Hamdi v. Rumsfeld (2004)
-Should the government be able to indefinitely hold a U.S. citizen accused of being an "illegal enemy combatant" and deny them their due process rights?
The Situation (Adam)
State the facts of the case. What happened?
- An American citizen named Yaser Hamdi was born in Louisiana and went to work in Afghanistan in 2001. While in Afghanistan he was detained by American soldiers for suspected of working with the Taliban and being an "enemy combatant". He was then sent to a military prison in Virginia.
How did the case get to the Supreme Court?
-At first, a district court ruled in favor of Hamdi, but an appellate court appealed the district court's ruling. The appellate court ruled that district courts did not have the power to intervene in oversea issues regarding the Legislative and Executive Branch. From there, the case was …show more content…
How did it apply?
What right(s) were at issue?
-The legal issues presented in this case relate to citizens of the United States fighting for an enemy force. Hamdi was found in Afghanistan while the United States were at war with them, which constitutes treason. Hamdi was also an American citizen, and the 5th and 14th amendment guarantees due process and equal protection under the law, which Hamdi was not given. Hamdi was detained immediately after being accused without going to court.
Parties (Both)
Who were the parties involved?
-Yaser Hamdi was the party who was suing the Secretary of State, Donald Rumsfeld.
What is their position (argument)?
(Adam for party A- Hamdi)
-Yaser Hamdi was detained as an “enemy combatant”. The Executive Branch never specified what an “enemy combatant” was. If he was still an American citizen being held in a prison in the United States, then why was he denied certain rights that Americans should not be denied? Hamdi was denied his 14th and 5th amendment due process rights, and he never received a lawyer or a trail.
(Kyle for party B-
-Should the government be able to indefinitely hold a U.S. citizen accused of being an "illegal enemy combatant" and deny them their due process rights?
The Situation (Adam)
State the facts of the case. What happened?
- An American citizen named Yaser Hamdi was born in Louisiana and went to work in Afghanistan in 2001. While in Afghanistan he was detained by American soldiers for suspected of working with the Taliban and being an "enemy combatant". He was then sent to a military prison in Virginia.
How did the case get to the Supreme Court?
-At first, a district court ruled in favor of Hamdi, but an appellate court appealed the district court's ruling. The appellate court ruled that district courts did not have the power to intervene in oversea issues regarding the Legislative and Executive Branch. From there, the case was …show more content…
How did it apply?
What right(s) were at issue?
-The legal issues presented in this case relate to citizens of the United States fighting for an enemy force. Hamdi was found in Afghanistan while the United States were at war with them, which constitutes treason. Hamdi was also an American citizen, and the 5th and 14th amendment guarantees due process and equal protection under the law, which Hamdi was not given. Hamdi was detained immediately after being accused without going to court.
Parties (Both)
Who were the parties involved?
-Yaser Hamdi was the party who was suing the Secretary of State, Donald Rumsfeld.
What is their position (argument)?
(Adam for party A- Hamdi)
-Yaser Hamdi was detained as an “enemy combatant”. The Executive Branch never specified what an “enemy combatant” was. If he was still an American citizen being held in a prison in the United States, then why was he denied certain rights that Americans should not be denied? Hamdi was denied his 14th and 5th amendment due process rights, and he never received a lawyer or a trail.
(Kyle for party B-