Abstract
This is a predictive Note that will examine the doctrine relating to war-time detention and endeavor to decipher who currently maintains a right to challenge executive detention in the wake of Boumediene. This Note therefore does not centrally discuss the authority of the United States to detain wartime prisoners, what procedure is due to detainees, the wisdom of the Boumediene approach to constitutional domain, or any other related issues. Instead, this Note will attempt to define the outer contours of the Suspension Clause by looking through the Boumediene prism to determine who may presently invoke the protections of the Suspension Clause and in what contexts outside of Guantánamo Bay those protections apply. This Note proceeds in three parts. Part I provides a background on habeas corpus, the heart of the protection preserved in the Suspension Clause, and its semblance in the extraterritorial arena. Part II outlines the history leading up to Boumediene and the law surrounding this decision. Part III will then critically analyze Boumediene and its progeny against the Court's prior precedent in order to develop a framework for analyzing the Suspension Clause. Part III finally uses these concepts in several hypothetical scenarios in order to better illustrate the length and strength of the Suspension Clause, as it stands today.
Recommended Citation
Justin D. D'Aloia,
From Baghdad to Bagram: The Length & Strength of the Suspension Clause After Boumediene,
33 Fordham Int'l L.J. 957
(2009).
Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ilj/vol33/iss3/5