This Comment argues that the Combatant Status Review Tribunals were not competent to deny Prisoner of War status because they were charged only with identifying enemy combatants, a broad category that by its own terms includes many POWs. Given the substantial overlap between the definitions of enemy combatant and POW, a CSRT\u27s affirmative enemy combatant determination actually supports a detainee\u27s POW status. Thus, even after their enemy combatant status has been adjudicated by the CSRTs, Guantánamo detainees should still be treated as presumptive POWs
What does the law of armed conflict say about detention in non-international armed conflict? Is the ...
The White House administration of George W. Bush faced a crisis when an attack was committed on Unit...
International law grants to legitimate combatants the right to kill enemy soldiers both in wars of a...
One of the most commonly asserted justifications for denying habeas review to individuals detained b...
This article addresses the limited and distinct function of the Combatant Status Review Tribunal\u27...
In January 2002, when the first group of detainees arrived at the United States Navy base at Guantán...
In Rasul v. Bush, a divided Supreme Court declared that “a state of war is not a blank check for the...
This article examines whether a Detaining State is obliged to recognize prisoner of war status for i...
The United States administration’s policy of detaining ‘unlawful enemy combatants’ at the United Sta...
After the U.S. Supreme Court held that U.S. courts have jurisdiction to hear legal challenges on beh...
The United States administration’s policy of detaining ‘unlawful enemy combatants’ at the United Sta...
The United States of America has in its custody several hundred Taliban and Al Qaeda combatants who ...
The objective of this thesis is to explore and analyze some of the major difficulties, challenges, a...
The Authorization for Use of Military Force ( AUMF ) provides broad powers for a president after Sep...
This Comment explores the conflict between two federal laws when prisoners challenging their confine...
What does the law of armed conflict say about detention in non-international armed conflict? Is the ...
The White House administration of George W. Bush faced a crisis when an attack was committed on Unit...
International law grants to legitimate combatants the right to kill enemy soldiers both in wars of a...
One of the most commonly asserted justifications for denying habeas review to individuals detained b...
This article addresses the limited and distinct function of the Combatant Status Review Tribunal\u27...
In January 2002, when the first group of detainees arrived at the United States Navy base at Guantán...
In Rasul v. Bush, a divided Supreme Court declared that “a state of war is not a blank check for the...
This article examines whether a Detaining State is obliged to recognize prisoner of war status for i...
The United States administration’s policy of detaining ‘unlawful enemy combatants’ at the United Sta...
After the U.S. Supreme Court held that U.S. courts have jurisdiction to hear legal challenges on beh...
The United States administration’s policy of detaining ‘unlawful enemy combatants’ at the United Sta...
The United States of America has in its custody several hundred Taliban and Al Qaeda combatants who ...
The objective of this thesis is to explore and analyze some of the major difficulties, challenges, a...
The Authorization for Use of Military Force ( AUMF ) provides broad powers for a president after Sep...
This Comment explores the conflict between two federal laws when prisoners challenging their confine...
What does the law of armed conflict say about detention in non-international armed conflict? Is the ...
The White House administration of George W. Bush faced a crisis when an attack was committed on Unit...
International law grants to legitimate combatants the right to kill enemy soldiers both in wars of a...