By a 6-3 margin, the US Supreme Court in the case of Rasul v. Bush ruled against the Bush Administration’s policy of detaining foreign nationals as “enemy combatants” at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, Cuba.

Two Australians and twelve Kuwaitis filed the petition and each declared that he was never involved in terrorist acts, has not been charged with any violation, and has been denied access to counsel and the courts. 

The Bush administration asserted that the plaintiffs in this case were not entitled to the usual rights of prisoners of war set out in the Geneva Conventions.  Government officials also claimed that enemy combatants are not even allowed the constitutional protections given to ordinary criminal suspects.  The Administration stated that only the president has the authority to order detention of enemy combatants, and the courts have no business reviewing President Bush’s decision in this matter. 

The main question before the Supreme Court was whether the habeas corpus right to judicial review of detention applies in an area over which the United States has complete and exclusive jurisdiction, but not “ultimate sovereignty.”

Even though the United States holds foreign prisoners in other lands, this decision applies only to Guantanamo detainees.  In this case, the Supreme Court held that the Cuban base is not beyond the reach of American courts even though it is outside the country.  The court also concurred that there is no distinction between U.S. citizens and non-U.S. citizens in the right to §2241 habeas corpus review.

However, the Supreme Court did agree with the administration by ruling that Congress gave President Bush the authority to seize and hold a U.S. citizen, Yaser Esam Hamdi, as an alleged enemy combatant.  The court majority also agreed that Hamdi was not getting all the protection he would normally receive in a federal district court hearing.  Justice Sandra Day O’Connor said that Hamdi “unquestionably has the right to access to counsel” and suggested a military tribunal as a place to hear Hamdi’s side of the story.

Attorneys from the Center for Constitutional Rights filed this case on behalf of some of the detainees and intend to seek access to their clients within the week.  Joseph Margulies, a lawyer with the Center, said the government now has to provide specific evidence for each detainee.  He added, “You don’t simply hold people in a lawless void based on nothing more than executive say-so.”