

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
The Obama administration has filed a brief with a federal appeals court
in Washington arguing that the approximately 600 detainees in U.S.
custody at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan are not entitled to have
their cases heard in U.S. courts. Some of the detainees at Bagram have
been held for up to six years with no meaningful opportunity to
challenge their detention, and there are some prisoners there who are
unconnected to the war in Afghanistan but who have been sent there from
locations around the world.
In June 2008, in the landmark case of Boumediene v. Bush,
the U.S. Supreme Court found that detainees at Guantanamo were entitled
to habeas corpus rights. In contravention of the principles established
in that ruling, the Obama administration is now arguing that these
rights do not apply at Bagram.
"Guantanamo was the Bush
administration's effort to do an end run around the Constitution, and
the Obama administration is now essentially using Bagram as a way to do
an end run around Guantanamo and the constitutional right of habeas
corpus found to apply there," said Jonathan Hafetz, a staff attorney
with the American Civil Liberties Union National Security Project.
"Simply shipping detainees from around the world to an alternative
destination is not a solution and flouts the principles laid down by
the Supreme Court."
Detainees at the Bagram prison
include non-Afghans who were initially arrested and detained outside of
Afghanistan but who continue to be denied full legal rights because the
U.S. government chose to render them to Afghanistan. A federal judge
found that the ruling in Boumediene v. Bush
entitled at least three prisoners at Bagram to habeas rights. While
those three detainees were not seized in Afghanistan, there also should
be judicial review of the established process and standards for
detaining those who were captured in Afghanistan to ensure that they
comport with our Constitution and laws.
The government's appeal comes on the
heels of the administration's announcement that it would release
guidelines for allowing detainees at the prison greater opportunity to
challenge their detention, by assigning military representatives - not
lawyers - to detainees to assist them in challenging their detention
before a military-appointed review board. The new guidelines were
attached to the government's appellate brief.
"It would be tragic to leave the
stigma of Guantanamo behind only to have Bagram become the next legal
black hole for detainees," said Melissa Goodman, a staff attorney with
the ACLU National Security Project. "Since the Supreme Court declared
that prisoners in Guantanamo Bay have the right to habeas corpus, it
would appear that the government is attempting to use Bagram, instead,
as the new off-shore warehouse for indefinite detention. Guantanamo has
been a stain on this nation's reputation at home and abroad, and the
last thing we should be doing is creating another version of it
elsewhere."
In April, the ACLU filed a Freedom
of Information Act (FOIA) request asking the Obama administration to
make public records pertaining to the detention and treatment of
prisoners held at Bagram. The government has not yet turned over the
records.
More information about the ACLU's FOIA request is online at: www.aclu.org/bagram
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
The Obama administration has filed a brief with a federal appeals court
in Washington arguing that the approximately 600 detainees in U.S.
custody at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan are not entitled to have
their cases heard in U.S. courts. Some of the detainees at Bagram have
been held for up to six years with no meaningful opportunity to
challenge their detention, and there are some prisoners there who are
unconnected to the war in Afghanistan but who have been sent there from
locations around the world.
In June 2008, in the landmark case of Boumediene v. Bush,
the U.S. Supreme Court found that detainees at Guantanamo were entitled
to habeas corpus rights. In contravention of the principles established
in that ruling, the Obama administration is now arguing that these
rights do not apply at Bagram.
"Guantanamo was the Bush
administration's effort to do an end run around the Constitution, and
the Obama administration is now essentially using Bagram as a way to do
an end run around Guantanamo and the constitutional right of habeas
corpus found to apply there," said Jonathan Hafetz, a staff attorney
with the American Civil Liberties Union National Security Project.
"Simply shipping detainees from around the world to an alternative
destination is not a solution and flouts the principles laid down by
the Supreme Court."
Detainees at the Bagram prison
include non-Afghans who were initially arrested and detained outside of
Afghanistan but who continue to be denied full legal rights because the
U.S. government chose to render them to Afghanistan. A federal judge
found that the ruling in Boumediene v. Bush
entitled at least three prisoners at Bagram to habeas rights. While
those three detainees were not seized in Afghanistan, there also should
be judicial review of the established process and standards for
detaining those who were captured in Afghanistan to ensure that they
comport with our Constitution and laws.
The government's appeal comes on the
heels of the administration's announcement that it would release
guidelines for allowing detainees at the prison greater opportunity to
challenge their detention, by assigning military representatives - not
lawyers - to detainees to assist them in challenging their detention
before a military-appointed review board. The new guidelines were
attached to the government's appellate brief.
"It would be tragic to leave the
stigma of Guantanamo behind only to have Bagram become the next legal
black hole for detainees," said Melissa Goodman, a staff attorney with
the ACLU National Security Project. "Since the Supreme Court declared
that prisoners in Guantanamo Bay have the right to habeas corpus, it
would appear that the government is attempting to use Bagram, instead,
as the new off-shore warehouse for indefinite detention. Guantanamo has
been a stain on this nation's reputation at home and abroad, and the
last thing we should be doing is creating another version of it
elsewhere."
In April, the ACLU filed a Freedom
of Information Act (FOIA) request asking the Obama administration to
make public records pertaining to the detention and treatment of
prisoners held at Bagram. The government has not yet turned over the
records.
More information about the ACLU's FOIA request is online at: www.aclu.org/bagram
The Obama administration has filed a brief with a federal appeals court
in Washington arguing that the approximately 600 detainees in U.S.
custody at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan are not entitled to have
their cases heard in U.S. courts. Some of the detainees at Bagram have
been held for up to six years with no meaningful opportunity to
challenge their detention, and there are some prisoners there who are
unconnected to the war in Afghanistan but who have been sent there from
locations around the world.
In June 2008, in the landmark case of Boumediene v. Bush,
the U.S. Supreme Court found that detainees at Guantanamo were entitled
to habeas corpus rights. In contravention of the principles established
in that ruling, the Obama administration is now arguing that these
rights do not apply at Bagram.
"Guantanamo was the Bush
administration's effort to do an end run around the Constitution, and
the Obama administration is now essentially using Bagram as a way to do
an end run around Guantanamo and the constitutional right of habeas
corpus found to apply there," said Jonathan Hafetz, a staff attorney
with the American Civil Liberties Union National Security Project.
"Simply shipping detainees from around the world to an alternative
destination is not a solution and flouts the principles laid down by
the Supreme Court."
Detainees at the Bagram prison
include non-Afghans who were initially arrested and detained outside of
Afghanistan but who continue to be denied full legal rights because the
U.S. government chose to render them to Afghanistan. A federal judge
found that the ruling in Boumediene v. Bush
entitled at least three prisoners at Bagram to habeas rights. While
those three detainees were not seized in Afghanistan, there also should
be judicial review of the established process and standards for
detaining those who were captured in Afghanistan to ensure that they
comport with our Constitution and laws.
The government's appeal comes on the
heels of the administration's announcement that it would release
guidelines for allowing detainees at the prison greater opportunity to
challenge their detention, by assigning military representatives - not
lawyers - to detainees to assist them in challenging their detention
before a military-appointed review board. The new guidelines were
attached to the government's appellate brief.
"It would be tragic to leave the
stigma of Guantanamo behind only to have Bagram become the next legal
black hole for detainees," said Melissa Goodman, a staff attorney with
the ACLU National Security Project. "Since the Supreme Court declared
that prisoners in Guantanamo Bay have the right to habeas corpus, it
would appear that the government is attempting to use Bagram, instead,
as the new off-shore warehouse for indefinite detention. Guantanamo has
been a stain on this nation's reputation at home and abroad, and the
last thing we should be doing is creating another version of it
elsewhere."
In April, the ACLU filed a Freedom
of Information Act (FOIA) request asking the Obama administration to
make public records pertaining to the detention and treatment of
prisoners held at Bagram. The government has not yet turned over the
records.
More information about the ACLU's FOIA request is online at: www.aclu.org/bagram