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.

Try in SPARQL Jump to: Statements Referenced by

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

Referenced by (3)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

opinion in Rasul v. Bush relatedTo Hamdi v. Rumsfeld
U.S. Supreme Court case Boumediene v. Bush relatedCase Hamdi v. Rumsfeld
subject surface form: Boumediene v. Bush
Ex parte Quirin (U.S. Supreme Court case) relatedTo Hamdi v. Rumsfeld
subject surface form: Ex parte Quirin