This Note examines Padilla v. Bush as an example of the contemporary application of enemy combatant law. This Note argues that in present and future applications of enemy combatant law, courts should treat Padilla as the preferred model of application because Padilla preserves more Constitutional protections, specifically the right to counsel in bringing a habeas petition, than do Hamdi or Quirin. The Padilla decision is preferable to Hamdi because Padilla restricts the movement of enemy combatant law away from the ex- press criminal protections of the Constitution. In contrast, Hamdi greatly accelerates such movement
On June 28, 2004, the United States Supreme Court released its much awaited decisions in the cases p...
Is the term enemy combatant an established legal category of persons under international law? Has th...
This Article argues that the issue of enemy combatant detentions should be studied through the lens ...
This Note examines Padilla v. Bush as an example of the contemporary application of enemy combatant ...
This comment examines the unequal treatment of United States citizens who are labeled enemy combatan...
The Supreme Court will decide as a matter of law whether an American citizen detained as an enemy co...
This report provides background information regarding the cases of two U.S. citizens deemed “enemy c...
The last decade has seen intense disputes about whether alleged terrorists captured during the nontr...
In considering the validity of enemy combatant status and military detention for alleged terrorist...
Relying on Article I Presidential War Powers, the Bush administration has employed many detention an...
In 1944, in Korematsu v. United States, the Supreme Court made a major error in judgment. It ruled t...
This Comment explores the government\u27s right to treat citizens as enemy combatants and whether th...
The federal government\u27s reaction to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, included a wide...
The control of the Executive in emergency, that is of their actions and measures undertaken in such ...
U.S. counterterrorism operations today are being carried out on an unprecedented scale. Since the at...
On June 28, 2004, the United States Supreme Court released its much awaited decisions in the cases p...
Is the term enemy combatant an established legal category of persons under international law? Has th...
This Article argues that the issue of enemy combatant detentions should be studied through the lens ...
This Note examines Padilla v. Bush as an example of the contemporary application of enemy combatant ...
This comment examines the unequal treatment of United States citizens who are labeled enemy combatan...
The Supreme Court will decide as a matter of law whether an American citizen detained as an enemy co...
This report provides background information regarding the cases of two U.S. citizens deemed “enemy c...
The last decade has seen intense disputes about whether alleged terrorists captured during the nontr...
In considering the validity of enemy combatant status and military detention for alleged terrorist...
Relying on Article I Presidential War Powers, the Bush administration has employed many detention an...
In 1944, in Korematsu v. United States, the Supreme Court made a major error in judgment. It ruled t...
This Comment explores the government\u27s right to treat citizens as enemy combatants and whether th...
The federal government\u27s reaction to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, included a wide...
The control of the Executive in emergency, that is of their actions and measures undertaken in such ...
U.S. counterterrorism operations today are being carried out on an unprecedented scale. Since the at...
On June 28, 2004, the United States Supreme Court released its much awaited decisions in the cases p...
Is the term enemy combatant an established legal category of persons under international law? Has th...
This Article argues that the issue of enemy combatant detentions should be studied through the lens ...