Keywords
habeas corpus, constitution, detainess, evidence
Abstract
In Boumediene v. Bush, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that the detainees held at Guantánamo Bay have a constitutional right to a writ of habeas corpus and are entitled to a “meaningful review” of their habeas petitions. This Note attempts to reconcile the need for a “meaningful review” with the government’s reliance on classified evidence that is completely inaccessible to the detainee-petitioners. After examining three other contexts in which the reliance on classified evidence has been sanctioned—federal criminal courts, immigration cases, and the ongoing military commissions at Guantánamo—this Note concludes that a “meaningful review” of the Guantánamo habeas petitions requires that the detainees be provided with regulated access to the evidence against them. Specifically, this Note recommends that the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA) or a CIPA-like statute be adapted to the habeas context so that detainees have, at a minimum, summaries of the key evidence against them.
Recommended Citation
Sarah Lorr,
Reconciling Classified Evidence and a Petitioner's Right to a "Meaningful Review" at Guantanamo Bay: A Legislative Solution,
77 Fordham L. Rev. 2669
(2009).
Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol77/iss5/18