Hamdi v. Rumsfeld
E582776
Hamdi v. Rumsfeld is a 2004 U.S. Supreme Court case that held American citizens designated as enemy combatants have the right to challenge their detention before a neutral decision-maker.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Hamdi v. Rumsfeld canonical | 3 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T6260170 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
Target entity: Hamdi v. Rumsfeld Context triple: [opinion in Rasul v. Bush, relatedTo, Hamdi v. Rumsfeld]
-
A.
U.S. Supreme Court case Boumediene v. Bush
Boumediene v. Bush is a landmark 2008 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held foreign detainees at Guantánamo Bay have a constitutional right to seek habeas corpus review in federal courts.
-
B.
Hamdi
Hamdi is a common given name and nickname in Arabic-speaking cultures, often used as a familiar or affectionate form of longer names such as Ahmed.
-
C.
INS v. Chadha
INS v. Chadha is a landmark 1983 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down the legislative veto as unconstitutional, significantly reshaping the balance of power between Congress and the executive branch.
-
D.
Van Orden v. Perry
Van Orden v. Perry is a 2005 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the constitutionality of a Ten Commandments monument on Texas State Capitol grounds against an Establishment Clause challenge.
-
E.
opinion in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld
The opinion in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld is a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision, authored by Justice John Paul Stevens, that limited presidential wartime authority by ruling that the military commissions set up to try Guantánamo detainees violated U.S. law and the Geneva Conventions.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
Target entity: Hamdi v. Rumsfeld Target entity description: Hamdi v. Rumsfeld is a 2004 U.S. Supreme Court case that held American citizens designated as enemy combatants have the right to challenge their detention before a neutral decision-maker.
-
A.
U.S. Supreme Court case Boumediene v. Bush
Boumediene v. Bush is a landmark 2008 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held foreign detainees at Guantánamo Bay have a constitutional right to seek habeas corpus review in federal courts.
-
B.
Hamdi
Hamdi is a common given name and nickname in Arabic-speaking cultures, often used as a familiar or affectionate form of longer names such as Ahmed.
-
C.
INS v. Chadha
INS v. Chadha is a landmark 1983 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down the legislative veto as unconstitutional, significantly reshaping the balance of power between Congress and the executive branch.
-
D.
Van Orden v. Perry
Van Orden v. Perry is a 2005 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the constitutionality of a Ten Commandments monument on Texas State Capitol grounds against an Establishment Clause challenge.
-
E.
opinion in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld
The opinion in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld is a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision, authored by Justice John Paul Stevens, that limited presidential wartime authority by ruling that the military commissions set up to try Guantánamo detainees violated U.S. law and the Geneva Conventions.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (49)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
legal case ⓘ |
| arguedDate | April 28, 2004 ⓘ |
| citation | 542 U.S. 507 ⓘ |
| concurrenceBy |
David H. Souter
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Ruth Bader Ginsburg NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| concurrenceInJudgmentBy |
David H. Souter
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Ruth Bader Ginsburg NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvisionInterpreted |
Article II of the United States Constitution
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | June 28, 2004 ⓘ |
| dissentBy |
Antonin Scalia
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Clarence Thomas NERFINISHED ⓘ John Paul Stevens NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| docketNumber | No. 03-6696 ⓘ |
| hasParty |
Donald H. Rumsfeld
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Yaser Esam Hamdi NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasPartyRole |
Donald H. Rumsfeld – respondent
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Yaser Esam Hamdi – petitioner NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| holding |
A U.S. citizen designated as an enemy combatant must be given a meaningful opportunity to contest the factual basis for that detention before a neutral decision-maker.
ⓘ
Separation of powers does not bar judicial review of the detention of a U.S. citizen as an enemy combatant. ⓘ The Authorization for Use of Military Force authorizes the detention of U.S. citizens captured in Afghanistan as enemy combatants, subject to due process limits. NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| jurisdiction | federal question jurisdiction ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
detention of U.S. citizens as enemy combatants
ⓘ
due process rights of enemy combatants ⓘ interpretation of the Authorization for Use of Military Force ⓘ scope of executive war powers ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy | Sandra Day O’Connor NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| originatingCourt | United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| pageInUnitedStatesReports | 507 ⓘ |
| pluralityJoinedBy |
Anthony M. Kennedy
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Stephen G. Breyer NERFINISHED ⓘ William H. Rehnquist NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| pluralityOpinionBy | Sandra Day O’Connor NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| precedentFor | judicial review of enemy combatant detentions ⓘ |
| relatedTo |
War on Terror
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
detention at Guantánamo Bay and other military facilities ⓘ |
| resultForHamdi | remanded for further proceedings consistent with due process requirements ⓘ |
| shortDescription | U.S. Supreme Court case recognizing due process rights of U.S. citizens detained as enemy combatants to challenge their detention before a neutral decision-maker. ⓘ |
| statuteInterpreted | Authorization for Use of Military Force of 2001 NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| subjectMatter |
civil liberties in wartime
ⓘ
executive power ⓘ habeas corpus ⓘ national security law ⓘ |
| volumeInUnitedStatesReports | 542 ⓘ |
| voteSplit | plurality decision ⓘ |
| yearDecided | 2004 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Subject: Hamdi v. Rumsfeld Description of subject: Hamdi v. Rumsfeld is a 2004 U.S. Supreme Court case that held American citizens designated as enemy combatants have the right to challenge their detention before a neutral decision-maker.
Referenced by (3)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.