Quote:
Originally Posted by Polar
But it does not grant habeas corpus to enemy combatants taken on the field of battle, either.
|
It most certainly DOES. In Boumediene v. Bush, Dec 5, 2007 the court recognized habeas corpus rights for Gitmo detainees. The first people were released from there under writs of habeas corpus starting October of that year.
EDIT: Okay,
technically, the Constitution doesn't grant ANYBODY the right of habeas corpus. That's not a right explicitly granted by the Constitution. It's a piece of common law adopted from very old British practice. But it remains one of our fundamental legal rights nonetheless, and the Court has held that it extends to non-citizens and people being detained at the pleasure of the President.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Polar
They are not covered by the Geneva Convention, for that matter.
|
In fact, the Court ruled in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld on June 29, 2006 that so-called "enemy combatants" were entitled to the protections of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Convention--in short, deciding that the made-up classification "enemy combatant" didn't suddenly NOT make them prisoners of war.
So... I get your opinion on the matter, but the people who actually have the job of interpreting the Constitution and our nations laws disagree with your assertions.