- 2005/06

SUPREME COURT
HAMDI
Vs.
RUMSFELD

:
.

:
[ 418]

2006

. ....3
. ........4
. ......6
V. : Rasul v. Bush........9
V. ..........10
VI. ....17
19
...25
....27
- ......28

: (..418 )

I.
28 2004 Supreme Court
,
1.

,
,
2
3 , .
, enemy
combatants, 4,
,


. 9
,

,
.
,
5,
Bush, 11
2001. OConnor,
,
1

. Supreme Court of the United States: Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, : (03-6696)

542 US 507/2004, :
http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/28june20041215/www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/03pdf/0
3-6696.pdf. ( ).
2
.3 , :
http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/0/6fef854a3517b75ac125641e004a9e68?OpenDocument
3
. White House, Fact Sheet Status of Detainees at Guantanamo, 7/2/2002,
: www.whitehouse.gov.
4
. , 9.7.2004 (. ) :
www.kathimerini.gr. . Michael Dorf What is an unlawful combatant and
why it matters: the status of detained Al Gaeda and Taliban fighters, 23.1.2002 Who decides
whether Yaser Hamdi, or any other citizen, is an enemy combatant?, 21.8.2002, :
http://writ.news.findlaw.com
5
. : http://www.in.gr/news/article.asp, 28.6.2004
Bush 20.4.2004
, ..


(blank check)
, 6.
II.
11 2001, al Qaeda
. 3.000 .
,
,
,
, , ,

,
, ,
(Authorization for Use of Military Force AUMF)7.
, Bush ,
al Qaeda
aliban, .
,
Taliban,
. Yaser Esam Hamdi.
Hamdi, , 1980 Louisiana
3
. 2001 .
,
, ,
Taliban .
-
2002- Guantanamo
. 2002
Hamdi, rfolk Virginia,
6

. .., .29(D) (OConnor opinion).

. Public law 107-40, 115 Stat. 224 (2001), 18
2001.
7

 2 ,
,
2004 Charleston
.
2002, Hamdi, Esam Fouad Hamdi,
habeas corpus8 , Donald Rumsfeld,
,
Virginia, amdi , next friend9.
habeas corpus,
Hamdi ,

(relief work)
,

, 18 U.S.Code 4001(a).

,
10.
Hamdi (by accident),
11.
8

Magna Charta.

. .
Rasul v. Bush . 5.
9

,

.
10


.
. , ,
. 2 5
- - "
,
, , ,
". , 1
- "
" -, - ,
5, "
". 14
, , ,
. . . ;
: http://www.krama.net.
11
Supreme Court Ex
parte Quirin,

 Hamdi ,
,
Samuel Johnson 12.
,
Hamdi ,

,
.
,
Michael Mobbs, ,
Hamdi
, ,


, 13.
I.
Virginia
Mobbs ,
(hearsay evidence) ,
,
14.
, ,
,

Hmdi .
,
,

.
12
. Dictionary of Quotations1989, Samuel Johnson 17 , :
http://www.bartleby.com/73/1306.html.
13
. .. . 5 (OConnor opinion).
14
,

.

, , . , ,
. ,

,
,
Hamdi,
Supreme Court, 2004. ,
Hamdi ,
,
.
, (Fourth Circuit),
,
Hmdi
, AUMF
Hmdi . ,
Hmdi ,
,
,
Hamdi,
15.
,

, ,
. habeas corpus


.
, Hamdi
,
. ,


.
15

Judge Diana Gribbon Motz of the Fourth Circuit ().

 16,
habeas corpus17, 8 118.
AUMF
Hmdi, (due
process), 14
19, ,
,
,
20.
, Hmdi
,
5 21.

V. : Rasul v. Bush

16

,
(
). Supreme Court

.
, . . Law Dictionary, fifth edition, by Steven
H. Gifis Barrons.
17
Scalia , habeas corpus
1679 . habeas
corpus, .
. .. . 4. (Scalia opinion).
18
8 1 ,
,
, .
19
. http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am14, 14th Amendment: All
persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of
the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which
shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive
any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its
jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
20
. .. . 2 (Syllabus): "Due process demands that a citizen held in the United States as
an enemy combatant be given a meaningful opportunity to contest the factual basis for that detention
before a neutral decisionmaker", . .. .23. (OConnor opinion),
.
21
. : Barbara Olshansky, Shayana Kadidal, Michael Ratner and William
Goodman, :
www.ccr-ny.org/v2/legal/september_11th/sept11Article.asp?ObjID=SFG3oUP6Vx&cONTENT=93


, Hamdi
Rumsfeld,
Supreme Court. , Guantanamo case22,
6 3,
Guantanamo, , ,
,

23. John Paul Stevens,
, , ,
24.
,
Guantanamo25. ,
Supreme Court Hamdi
,
26.
, Hamdi,
, Thomas
inter arma silent leges.
27.
22

. . Rasul v. Bush, : 542 U.S.-:124 S.Ct. 2686 (2004)

, ,
,
. . . .15, .15
Rasul v. Bush.
24

, Guantanamo .
, ,
Guantanamo, , ,
.
habeas corpus
. . David Stout, New York Times Supreme Court Affirms
Detainees' Right to Use Courts, 28 2004, :
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/28/politics/28CND-SCOT.html?
ex=1246161600en=686a59d84fdc7717ei=5090partner=rssuserland
25

, 191

. . Toni Locy Guantanamo hearings start today
USA TODAY, 23.8.2004 : http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-08-23gitmo-hearings_x.htm
26
, ,
.
27
. .. . 27(Scalia opinion).
23

 , ,
, 28 2004.
, Padilla v. Rumsfeld28,
Jose Padilla, , 5 4,
,
,
Charleston
. ,
.
V.
Supreme
Court
,
, .
Hamdi 29.
,
,
,
. Hamdi non-detention
act30, ,
.
non-detention act, (
), ,

.
,

,
28

. Rumsfeld v. Padilla (03-1027) 542 US 426 (2004), :

http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/28june20041215/www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/03pdf/0
3-1027.pdf.
29
.
30
. 18 U.S.Code 4001, :
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00004001----000-.html

10

 . AUMF,
11 .

(Commander in Chief)31,
,
.
, ,
,
,
,

32.
AUMF
, Supreme Court,
.

, Hamdi ,
,
, AUMF33.
Souter, , ,
.
Souter, AUMF,
, Emergency Detention
Act34. , 1950
. ,
.

,

31

Souter
,
, . . . .14 (Souter opinion).
32
. .. .9 . 3(Souter opinion).
33
(.12), ,

.
34
. : http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RS22130.pdf

11

 , Korematsu35.
1944, , ,
,
,
.

,
Korematsu .

( )
,
36.
AUMF,
37,
. ,
Souter, , ,
. ,
(Congress Act), ,
,

.
,
, non-detention act ,
, , .
, 33
AUMF, P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act38,

35

. Korematsu v. United States 323 US 214 (1944),

18 1944, : http://www.tourolaw.edu/patch/Korematsu/#F1
36
The principle then lies about like a loaded weapon ready for the hand of any authority that can bring
forward a plausible claim of an urgent need. Jackson. . :
http://web.utk.edu/~scheb/Korematsu.htm
37

- - . . John Paul Stevens
Rumsfeld v. Padilla.
38
: Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate
Tools to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism of 2001, HR 3162 RDS, 107th Congress 1st Session, H. R.
3162 (in the senate of the united states) October 24, 2001.

12

 39.
7 ,

. , ,
,
,
,
.
,
, ,
,
,
.
, ,
AUMF, Hamdi,
, ,
,
.



. , ,
(due process) 40,
39

P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act,
. ,
AUMF,
. Laurence H. Tribe P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act, AUMF
.
, Gonzales
,
,
!!!
,
,
,
.
. . Laurence H. Tribe,
Harvard University, 6.1.2006, :
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/conyers.pdf
40
due process : ,
,
.. . :
http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_duep.html

13

, ,
41. ,
,
,
42.
Supreme Court
,
,
43.
44,


.

,
(due process), ,
.
,
41

Guantanamo.
,
. ,

, : , ,
, , ,
, .
,
.
.
42
. . 7 (Souter opinion). .

:
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/036696.pdf, Dunham, Hamdi,
, :
!! ; .
habeas corpus; !!.
43

.
.
.. . 25(3) (OConnor opinion).
44
Mathews v. Eldridge
{ 424 US 319 (1976)}, (.22 .).
,
,
. Scalia
due process (.
.. .23 Scalia opinion).

14


, ,

, 45.
,
,
.
,

.

, .
Supreme Court,

46.

Scalia, :
Hamdi 47,
habeas
corpus48.
45

. .. . 23 (OConnor opinion).
: ,
. . 22
Salerno.
46
(.) it would turn our system of checks and balances on its head to suggest that a citizen could not
make his way to court with a challenge to the factual basis for his detention by his government, simply
because the Executive opposes making available such a challenge. Absent suspension of the writ by
Congress, a citizen detained as an enemy combatant is entitled to this process. Supreme Court
: Due process demands some system for a citizen detainee to refute his classification, the
proposed some evidence standard is inadequate. Any process in which the Executives factual
assertions go wholly unchallenged or are simply presumed correct without any opportunity for the
alleged combatant to demonstrate otherwise falls constitutionally short. () we have utilized the
some evidence standard in the past as a standard of review, not as a standard of proof. .
.. . 30 (OConnor opinion).
47
Scalia
, . (.
.. .22 . 5, Scalia opinion). habeas corpus, due process

.
48
habeas corpus
, . 1, .9 . 2 (Limits on Congress)
: http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#A1Sec9.

15

 ,
.

ad hoc,
.


.
, , ,
,
49
. , , Supreme Court

.
,
,
,
50. ,
,
,

51.
Scalia, ,
, (due process),
,
.
,
52.

49

At the same time, the exigencies of the circumstances may demand that, (), enemy combatant
proceedings may be tailored to alleviate their uncommon potential to burden the Executive at a time of
ongoing military conflict . .. .27 (OConnor).
50

, , .
51
OConnor
, , . .. .27
(OConnor).
52
. .. . 23 (Scalia).

16

VI.

,
, .
11 ,
,
,
.

. , ,
,
53. ,
,
,
,
54.


.
,
, , .
11 2004,
7 2005.
, ,
. ,
,
.
,

.
53

. Mary Ellen OConnell, Moritz, Ohio State University,

What is war? : www.jurist.law.pitt.edu/forum /oconnell1.php#5
54
CIA,
,
.

17

 ,
.
,
, ,
.

.

.
, . ,
,
.
,
,
.
,
.

, 55.

.
11
. ,
. 56.

55

. 2005 , :
www.amnesty.org.gr/library/report2005/amr.htm.
56
. Michelle J. Kinnucan, Rethinking the authorization of military force,

15

2002

Common
Dreams

:
http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0315-03.htm, Waters,
The Washington Times: Some of us, maybe foolishly, gave this president the
authority to go after the terrorists. We didn't know that he, too, was going to go crazy with it.

18


Authorization for Use of Military Force against terrorists
I.1 The law
(a) Introduction
Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday, the third day of January,
two thousand and one
Joint Resolution
To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the
recent attacks launched against the United States.

19

Whereas, on September 11, 2001, acts of treacherous violence were committed

against the United States and its citizens; and
Whereas, such acts render it both necessary and appropriate that the United States
exercise its rights to self-defense and to protect United States citizens both at home
and abroad; and
Whereas, in light of the threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United
States posed by these grave acts of violence; and
Whereas, such acts continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the
national security and foreign policy of the United States; and
Whereas, the President has authority under the Constitution to take action to deter and
prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America
in Congress assembled,
(b) Section 1 - Short Title
This joint resolution may be cited as the `Authorization for Use of Military Force'.
(c) Section 2 - Authorization For Use of United States Armed Forces
(a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and
appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines
planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on
September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent
any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations,
organizations or persons.
(b) War Powers Resolution Requirements(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of
the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to
constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the
War Powers Resolution.
(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS- Nothing in this resolution
supercedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.
Title 18, part III, chapter 301, 4001.
Limitation on detention; control of prisons
(a) No citizen shall be imprisoned or otherwise detained by the United States except
pursuant to an Act of Congress.
(b) (1) The control and management of Federal penal and correctional institutions,
except military or naval institutions, shall be vested in the Attorney General, who
shall promulgate rules for the government thereof, and appoint all necessary officers
and employees in accordance with the civil-service laws, the Classification Act, as
amended, and the applicable regulations.

20

(b)(2) The Attorney General may establish and conduct industries, farms, and other
activities and classify the inmates; and provide for their proper government,
discipline, treatment, care, rehabilitation, and reformation.
Title 28, part VI, chapter 153, 2241
Power to grant writ
(a) Writs of habeas corpus may be granted by the Supreme Court, any justice thereof,
the district courts and any circuit judge within their respective jurisdictions. The order
of a circuit judge shall be entered in the records of the district court of the district
wherein the restraint complained of is had.
(b) The Supreme Court, any justice thereof, and any circuit judge may decline to
entertain an application for a writ of habeas corpus and may transfer the application
for hearing and determination to the district court having jurisdiction to entertain it.
(c) The writ of habeas corpus shall not extend to a prisoner unless
(1) He is in custody under or by color of the authority of the United States or is
committed for trial before some court thereof; or
(2) He is in custody for an act done or omitted in pursuance of an Act of Congress, or
an order, process, judgment or decree of a court or judge of the United States; or
(3) He is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United
States; or
(4) He, being a citizen of a foreign state and domiciled therein is in custody for an act
done or omitted under any alleged right, title, authority, privilege, protection, or
exemption claimed under the commission, order or sanction of any foreign state, or
under color thereof, the validity and effect of which depend upon the law of nations;
or
(5) It is necessary to bring him into court to testify or for trial.
(d) Where an application for a writ of habeas corpus is made by a person in custody
under the judgment and sentence of a State court of a State which contains two or
more Federal judicial districts, the application may be filed in the district court for the
district wherein such person is in custody or in the district court for the district within
which the State court was held which convicted and sentenced him and each of such
district courts shall have concurrent jurisdiction to entertain the application. The
district court for the district wherein such an application is filed in the exercise of its
discretion and in furtherance of justice may transfer the application to the other
district court for hearing and determination.
The U.S. Constitution
Article I - The Legislative Branch
Section 9 - Limits on Congress
The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall
think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one
thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such
Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

21

The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in
Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.
No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
(No capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census
or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.) (Section in parentheses clarified
by Amendment XVI.)
No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.
No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue to the Ports
of one State over those of another: nor shall Vessels bound to, or from, one State, be
obliged to enter, clear, or pay Duties in another.
No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations
made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures
of all public Money shall be published from time to time.
No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any
Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress,
accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any
King, Prince or foreign State.
Amendment XIV
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the
jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they
reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or
immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its
jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to
their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state,
excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice
of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in
Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the
legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being
twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged,
except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein
shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear
to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state.
Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of
President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United
States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of
Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature,
or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the
United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or
22

given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds
of each House, remove such disability.
Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law,
including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in
suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United
States nor any state shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of
insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or
emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held
illegal and void.
Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the
provisions of this article.

HABEAS CORPUS57
FORM TO BE USED BY FEDERAL PRISONER
IN FILING A PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS UNDER 28 U.S.C.
2241
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Petitioner
(Full name under which you were convicted;
prison number; and full mailing address.)
Vs. CIVIL ACTION NO. _______________
Respondent
(Name of Warden or other authorized person
having custody of petitioner.)
PLEASE COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING. READ THE ENTIRE PETITION
BEFORE FILLING IT OUT.
ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS WHICH PERTAIN TO YOUR TYPE OF CLAIM.
1. This petition concerns: (Check appropriate blank.)
__________ a conviction
__________ a sentence (CAUTION: If you are attacking a sentence imposed under a
federal
judgment, you must first file a direct motion under 28 U.S.C. 2255 in the federal
court which entered the judgment.)
__________ jail or prison conditions
__________ prison discipline
__________ a parole problem
__________ other. State briefly:
______________________________________________

57

. : http://www.are.uscourts.gov/pdfforms/2241PetFed.pdf

23

2. Place of detention:
____________________________________________________________
3. Have you filed previous petitions for habeas corpus, motions under 28:2255, or any
other
applications, petitions or motions with respect to this conviction?
_________ Yes __________ No
If your answer above is Yes, give the following information:
a. Name of Court:
________________________________________________________________
b. Nature of Proceeding:
__________________________________________________________
c. Grounds raised:
_____________________________________________________________________
______
d. Result:
_____________________________________________________________________
_
e. Date of Result:
_______________________________________________________________
f. Citation or number of any written opinion or order entered pursuant to each such
disposition:
_____________________________________________________________________
______
4. If you did not file a motion under Section 2255 of Title 28, U.S.C., or if you filed
such a motion and it was denied, state why your remedy by way of such motion is
inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of your detention:
_____________________________________________________________________
______
5. Are you presently represented by counsel? _________ Yes __________ No
If so, name, address and phone number of counsel:
________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
______
6. Name and location of court which imposed sentence:
_____________________________________________________________________
______
7. Indictment or case number, if known:
____________________________________________
8. Offense or offenses for which sentence was imposed:
_____________________________________________________________________
______
9. Date upon which sentence was imposed and the terms of the sentence:

24

_____________________________________________________________________
___
10. When was a finding of guilty made? (Check one)
__________ After a plea of guilty
__________ After a plea of not guilty
__________ After a plea of nolo contendere
11. If you were found guilty after a plea of not guilty, was that finding made by:
__________ A jury
__________ A judge without a jury
12. Did you appeal from the judgment of conviction or the imposition of sentence?
_________ Yes __________ No
13. If you did appeal, give the following information for each appeal:
a. Name of Court:
_______________________________________________________________
b. Result:
_____________________________________________________________________
_
c. Date of Result:
_______________________________________________________________
d. Citation or number of opinion:
__________________________________________________
e. Grounds raised: (List each one.)
_____________________________________________________________________
______
Note: If you appealed more than once, attach an additional sheet of the same size and
give all the information requested above in question No. 13, a through e. Do not write
on the reverse of pages.
14. State CONCISELY every ground on which you claim that you are being held
unlawfully.
Summarize briefly the facts supporting each ground. If necessary, attach a single page
behind this page.
CAUTION: If you fail to set forth all grounds in this petition, you may be barred from
presenting additional grounds at a later date.
a. Ground one:
__________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
______
Supporting FACTS: (Tell your story BRIEFLY without citing cases or law. You are
CAUTIONED that you must state facts, not conclusions, in support of your grounds.
A rule of thumb to follow is who did exactly what to violate your rights at what time
or place.)
b. Ground two:
_________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
______

25

Supporting FACTS:
c. Ground three:
_______________________________________________________________
Supporting FACTS:
15. RELIEF: State briefly exactly what you want the court to do for you. Make no
legal
arguments. Cite no cases or statutes.
Signed this ____________ day of ________________________, 20_____.
Day Month Year
_______________________________________
Signature of Petitioner
I declare (or certify, verify or state) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true
and correct.
Executed on _________________________.
(Date)
_______________________________________
Signature of Petitioner

White House, Fact Sheet Status of Detainees at

Guantanamo,

7/2/2002,

www.whitehouse.gov.

Michael Dorf : What is an unlawful combatant and why it matters: the

status of detained Al Gaeda and Taliban fighters, 23.1.2002,
http://writ.news.findlaw.com.

Michael Dorf Who decides whether Yaser Hamdi, or any other

citizen, is an enemy combatant?, 21.8.2002
http://writ.news.findlaw.com.

(), 28.6.2004
Bush, in.gr.
26

(), 20.4.2004

Guantanamo, in.gr.

. ;,
http://www.krama.net.

Dictionary of Quotations 1989 by Samuel Johnson,

http://www.bartleby.com/73/1306.html.

Law Dictionary by Steven H. Gifis, fifth edition, Barrons.

CCR Legal Team - Barbara Olshansky, Shayana Kadidal, Michael Ratner,

William Goodman, Docket: Hamdi v. Rumsfeld ,
www.ccr-ny.org/.

Toni Locy Guantanamo hearings start today USA

TODAY,

23.8.2004,

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/.

David Stout New York Times Supreme Court Affirms Detainees'

Right to Use Courts, 28 2004,
http://www.nytimes.com/.

Laurence H. Tribe Harvard University, 6.1.2006,

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/conyers.pdf.

Supreme Court,

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/036696.pdf.

Mary Ellen OConnell, What is war?

www.jurist.law.pitt.edu/forum /oconnell1.php#5.

Michelle J. Kinnucan Rethinking the authorization of military force,

Common Dreams 15 2002,
http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0315-03.htm.

Brief for the American Bar Association as amicus curiae in support of

petitioners, International Law
Journal http://www.bepress.com/cgi/.

27

Brief of international humanitarian organizations and associations of

international journalists as amici curiae supporting petitioners,

International

Law

Journal

http://www.bepress.com/cgi/.

Brief of citizens for the common defence as amicus curiae in support of

respondents, International
Law Journal http://www.bepress.com/cgi/.

Brief of amicus curiae American Center for law & justice in support of
respondents, International
Law Journal http://www.bepress.com/cgi/.

Brief of Washington legal foundation, U.S. Representatives Joe Barton,

Walter Jones, and Lamar Smith and Allied educational foundation as amici
curiae in support of respondents,
International Law Journal http://www.bepress.com/cgi/.

Understanding Terrorism Cases, The Role of Federal Courts in Balancing

Liberties and Safety, U.S. Courts, Federal Judiciary,
http://www.uscourts.gov/.

Jim Carter Your right to make a lining Liberty,

http://usa-the-republic.com/revenue/liberty/part_5a.html

Elaine Cassel Terrorism Against the Constitution July 12, 2003,

http://www.counterpunch.org/cassel07122003.html.

Elaine Cassel Who Really Won June 29, 2004,

http://www.counterpunch.org/cassel06292004.html.

C. Clark Kissinger Revolutionary Worker: The Meaning of the

Supreme Court's Decision on "Enemy Combatants" July 18, 2004,

http://www.refuseandresist.org/detentions/art.php?aid=1441.

-
A "TA NEA" 12 2004 (.
17986), http://ta-nea.dolnet.gr.

28

David B. Rivkin and Lee A. Casey debate Jenny Martinez How should
the U.S. try suspected terrorists?, Legal Affairs

http://www.legalaffairs.org/webexclusive/debateclub_terror0904.msp.

Ronald Dworkin What the Court Really Said, The New York Review
of

Books,

August

12,

2004,

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/187.

Dana Priest and Scott Higham At Guantanamo, a Prison Within a

Prison, Washington Post December 17, 2004
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.

(),

17.10.2004

New York Times in.gr.

(), 8.9.2004

in.gr.

(), 3.8.2004
-

in.gr.

(), 28.6.2004
-

in.gr.

(), 26.2.2004
...

in.gr.

Jesselyn Radack The Government's Opportunistic Use of the "Enemy

Combatant" Label: How This Category Is Being Used as a Prosecution
Tactic, Monday, Oct. 11, 2004,
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/commentary/20041011_radack.html.

29

www.supremecourtus.gov

http://www.icrc.org

www.whitehouse.gov

www.kathimerini.gr

http://writ.news.findlaw.com

http://www.in.gr/news/article.asp

http://www.krama.net

http://www.usconstitution.net

www.ccr-ny.org

http://www.fas.org

http://www.tourolaw.edu

http://web.utk.edu

http://online.wsj.com

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_arguments

www.jurist.law.pitt.edu

www.amnesty.org.gr

http://www.commondreams.org

http://www.bepress.com

http://en.wikipedia.org

http://www.factbug.org

http://www.uscourts.gov

http://www.ccmep.org

http://www.windsofchange.net

http://www.kuwaitifreedom.org

http://writ.news.findlaw.com

http://www.law.cornell.edu

3 ,
http://www.europarl.eu.int.

U.S. Constitution, http://www.usconstitution.net.

30

Authorization for Use of Military Force Public law, 18 2001,

http://news.findlaw.com.

U.S.Code Title18, chapter 301, 4001,

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov.

U.S.Code Title 28, part VI, chapter 153, 2241,

http://www4.law.cornell.edu.

Emergency Detention Act 1950,

http://www.fas.org.

P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act, HR 3162 RDS, 107th Congress 1st Session (in the senate
of the united states) October 24, 2001,
http://www.asksam.com.

Hamdi v. Rumsfeld (2004), :

http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/28june20041215/www.supremecourt
us.gov/opinions/03pdf/03-6696.pdf

Rasul v. Bush (2004), :

http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/28june20041215/www.supremecourt
us.gov/opinions/03pdf/03-334.pdf

Rumsfeld v. Padilla (2004), :

http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/28june20041215/www.supremecourt
us.gov/opinions/03pdf/03-1027.pdf

korematsu v. United States (1944), :

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/korematsu.html

Mathews v. Eldridge (1976), :

http://www.publichealthlaw.net/Reader/docs/Mathews.pdf

Ex Parte Quirin (1942), :

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/quirin.html

31