Ramy prawne reżimu detencji wojskowej w prawie amerykańskim w świetle aktualnego orzecznictwa
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12797/Politeja.11.2014.27.02Keywords:
military detention, Guantanamo, “war on terror”, law of national securityAbstract
Military detention framework in American law – analysis of current case law
The practice of military detention of persons captured during the “global war on terror” has raised controversy both in the United States and abroad. This article, being the first in a series of articles analyzing the post‑2001 case law on military detention, focuses on the basic legal framework. The principal legal basis for military detention is the 2001 Congressional Authorization of Use of Military Force against organizations responsible for 9/11 attacks. Bush and Obama Administrations’ claim that the AUMF authorizes military detention has been accepted by the Supreme Court in a 2004 case Hamdi v. Rumsfeld and codified by Congress in 2011. The article briefly considers and rejects main objections against its constitutionality. More complex are the issues raised by the application of other legal rules that potentially apply to military detention: Due Process clause of the U.S. Constitution and international law of armed conflict, but under the current D.C. Circuit case law, neither of them limits the President’s detention authority. Instead, judges decide habeas corpus claims brought by the detainees on the basis of judge‑made common law rules.
Downloads
References
Podmiotowa
Akty prawne
U.S.C., ch. 153: Habeas Corpus, §§ 2241 et seq. (1947 z późn. zm.).
Agreement between the United States and Cuba for the Lease of Lands for Coaling and Naval Stations, Feb. 23, 1903, Treaty Series No. 418 (1903).
An Act for the Punishment of Certain Crimes against the United States, Apr. 30, 1790, 1st Cong., 2nd Sess., ch. 9, 1 Stat. 112 (1790).
An Act for the Safe Keeping and Accommodation of Prisoners of War, July 6, 1812, 12th Cong., 1st Sess., ch. 128, 2 Stat. 777 (1812).
Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104‑132, 110 Stat. 1214 (1996).
Authorization for Use of Military Force, Sept. 18, 2001, Pub. L. No. 107‑40, 115 Stat. 224 (2001)
Constitution of the United States, Sep. 17, 1788 (za: United States Code, 2006 ed.).
Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 (Department of Defense Appropriations Act for FY 2006), Pub. L. No. 109‑148,
Div. A, Title X, 119 Stat. 2680, 2739‑44 (2005).
Geneva Convention (III) Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, Aug. 12, 1949, 6 U.S.T. 3316, T.I.A.S. No. 3364 (1949).
Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, July 27, 1929, 47 Stat. 2021 (1929).
Hague Convention (IV): Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, Oct. 18, 1907, 36 Stat. 2277 (1907).
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Dec. 16, 1966, S. Treaty Doc. No. 95‑20, 6 I.L.M. 368, 999 U.N.T.S. 171 (1967).
Lease to the United States by the Government of Cuba of Certain Areas of Land and Water for Naval or Coaling Stations in Guantanamo and Bahia Honda, July 2, 1903, Treaty Series No. 426 (1903).
Magna Carta, 9 Hen. III (1225).
Military Commissions Act of 2006, Pub. L. No. 109‑366, 120 Stat. 2600 (2006).
Military Commissions Act of 2009, Pub. L. No. 111‑84, Div. A, Title XVIII, 123 Stat. 2190, 2574 (2009) (10 U.S.C., ch. 47a).
National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2012, Pub. L. No. 112‑81, 125 Stat. 1298 (2011) (10 U.S.C., § 801 note).
Statute of Treasons of 1351 (A Declaration which Offences shall be adjudged Treason), 25 Edw. III st. 5 ch. 2 (1351).
Treaty Defining Relations with Cuba, May 29, 1934, 48 Stat. 1683, Treaty Series No. 866 (1934).
War Powers Resolution, Pub. L. No. 93‑148, 87 Stat. 555 (1973) (50 U.S.C. §§ 1541 et seq.).
Projekty aktów prawnych
Detainee Security Act of 2011, H.R. 968, 112th Cong. (2011).
Enemy Belligerent Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act, S. 3081, 111th Cong. (2010).
Enemy Combatant Detention Review Act of 2008, S. 3401, 110th Cong. (2008).
Military Detainee Procedures Improvement Act of 2011, S. 551, 112th Cong. (2011).
Terrorist Detention Review Reform Act, S. 3707, 111th Cong. (2010).
Akty wykonawcze
Enemy Prisoners of War, Retained Personnel, Civilian Internees and Other Detainees, Army Regulation 190‑8, OPNAVINST 3461.6, AFJI 31‑304, MCO 3461.1 (1997).
Memorandum from President George W. Bush to the Vice President et al., Humane Treatment of Taliban and al Qaeda Detainees (7 II 2002).
Memorandum from the Secretary of Defense to Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Legal Status of Taliban and al Qaeda (19 I 2002).
Notice, Detention, Treatment, and Trial of Certain Non‑Citizens in the War against Terrorism, Presidential Military Order, 66 F.R. 57,833 (13 XI 2001).
Decyzje sądowe i administracyjne 32 County Sovereignty Comm. v. Dep’t of State, 292 F.3d 797 (D.C. Cir. 2002).
Al Maqaleh v. Gates, 605 F.3d 84 (D.C. Cir. 2010).
Al Odah v. United States, 321 F.3d 1134 (D.C. Cir. 2003).
Al‑Bihani v. Obama, 590 F.3d 866 (D.C. Cir. 2010) („Al Bihani I”).
Al‑Bihani v. Obama, 594 F.Supp.2d 35 (D.D.C. 2009). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0340035209105675
Al‑Bihani v. Obama, 619 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2010) („Al Bihani II”).
Al‑Marri v. Pucciarelli, 534 F.3d 213 (4th Cir. 2008) (en banc).
Al‑Marri v. Wright, 487 F.3d 160 (4th Cir. 2007). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-04434-9.50056-7
The Ambrose Light, 25 F. 408 (S.D.N.Y. 1885).
American Baptist Churches in the U.S.A. v. Meese, 712 F.Supp. 756 (N.D. Cal. 1989).
The Amy Warwick (The Prize Cases), 67 U.S. (2 Black) 635 (1863).
Bank of Columbia v. Okely, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 235 (1819).
Barron v. Baltimore, 32 U.S. (7 Pet.) 243 (1833).
Bas v. Tingy, 4 U.S. (4 Dall.) 37 (1800).
Boumediene v. Bush, 553 U.S. 723 (2008).
Bourn’s Case, Cro. Jac. 543, 79 Eng. Rep. 465 (K.B. Mich. 17 Jac. I).
Bowsher v. Synar, 478 U.S. 714 (1986).
Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484 (1973).
Bravo v. United States, 532 F.3d 1154 (11th Cir. 2008).
Breard v. Greene, 523 U.S. 371 (1998). DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1447456
Bridges v. Wixon, 326 U.S. 135 (1945).
Brown v. Allen, 344 U.S. 443 (1953).
Brown v. United States, 12 U.S. (8 Cranch) 110 (1814).
Campbell v. Clinton, 203 F.3d 19 (D.C. Cir. 2000).
Case of Fries, 9 F.Cas. 826 (C.C.D.Pa. 1799) (No. 5126).
Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, 30 U.S. (5 Pet.) 1, 8 L.Ed. 25 (1831).
Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984).
Christopher v. Harbury, 536 U.S. 403 (2002).
Colepaugh v. Looney, 235 F.2d 429 (10th Cir. 1956).
Cuban American Bar Ass’n, Inc. v. Christopher, 43 F.3d 1412 (11th Cir. 1995).
Dutton v. Warden, FCI Estill, 37 Fed.Appx. 51 (4th Cir. 2002).
Erie R.R. Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938).
Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 2 (1866).
Ex parte Quirin, 317 U.S. 1 (1942).
Fleming v. Page, 50 U.S. (9 How.) 603, 13 L.Ed. 276 (1850).
Flores v. Southern Peru Copper Corp., 414 F.3d 233 (2nd Cir. 2003).
Foster v. Neilson, 27 U.S. (2 Pet.) 253, 7 L.Ed. 415 (1829).
Garcia‑Mir v. Meese, 788 F.2d 1446 (11th Cir. 1986).
Gersman v. Group Health Ass’n, Inc., 975 F.2d 886 (D.C. Cir. 1992).
Gherebi v. Bush, 374 F.3d 727 (9th Cir. 2004).
Haitian Centers Council, Inc. v. McNary, 969 F.2d 1326 (2nd Cir. 1992).
Haitian Refugee Ctr. v. Gracey, 809 F.2d 794 (D.C. Cir. 1987).
Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 415 F.3d 33 (D.C. Cir. 2005). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.2005.494033019999
Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U.S. 557 (2006).
Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 316 F.3d 450, 185 A.L.R. Fed. 751 (4th Cir. 2003).
Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507 (2004).
Hamilton v. McClaughry, 136 F. 445 (C.C.D. Kan. 1905).
Handel v. Artukovic, 601 F.Supp. 1421 (C.D. Cal. 1985).
Harbury v. Deutch, 233 F.3d 596 (D.C. Cir. 2000).
Head Money Cases, 112 U.S. 580 (1884).
Hirabayashi v. United States, 320 U.S. 81 (1943).
Holmes v. Laird, 459 F.2d 1211 (D.C. Cir. 1972).
Hopfmann v. Connolly, 471 U.S. 459 (1985) (per curiam).
Hurtado v. California, 110 U.S. 516 (1884).
Huynh Thi Anh v. Levi, 586 F.2d 625 (6th Cir. 1978).
Igartua‑De La Rosa v. United States, 417 F.3d 145 (1st Cir. 2005) (en banc).
In re Goering and Others (Major War Criminals Case), 13 Ann. Dig. 203, 41 Am. J. Int’l L. 172 (I.M.T. (Nuremberg) 1946).
In re Medina, 19 I. & N. Dec. 734, Interim Decision 3078 (B.I.A. 1988).
In re Territo, 156 F.2d 142 (9th Cir. 1946).
In re Wulzen, 235 F. 362 (S.D. Ohio 1916).
In re Yamashita, 327 U.S. 1 (1946). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.1.4443.327-c
Iwanowa v. Ford Motor Co., 67 F.Supp.2d 424 (D.N.J. 1999).
Jifry v. FAA, 370 F.3d 1174 (D.C. Cir. 2004).
Jobson’s Case, Latch 160, 82 Eng. Rep. 325 (K.B. 14 Jac. I).
Jogi v. Voges, 425 F.3d 367 (7th Cir. 2005).
Johnson v. Eisentrager, 339 U.S. 763 (1950).
Jones v. United States, 137 U.S. 202 (1890).
Kaoru Yamataya v. Fisher, 189 U.S. 86 (1903).
Khalid v. Bush, 355 F.Supp.2d 311 (D.D.C. 2005). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emcrad.2005.04.001
Khan v. Obama, 741 F.Supp.2d 1 (D.D.C. 2010). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-76700-0_62
King v. Overton, 1 Sid. 387, 82 Eng. Rep. 1173 (K.B. Mich. 20 Car. II).
King v. The Earl of Crewe ex parte Sekgome, 2 K.B. 576 (C.A.) (1910).
Kiyemba v. Obama, 555 F.3d 1022 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (Kiyemba I).
Kiyemba v. Obama, 561 F.3d 509 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (Kiyemba II).
Linder v. Calero Portocarrero, 747 F.Supp. 1452 (S.D. Fla. 1990).
Little v. Barreme, 6 U.S. (2 Cranch) 170 (1804).
Luckey v. Miller, 929 F.2d 618 (11th Cir. 1991).
Madison‑Hughes v. Shalala, 80 F.3d 1121 (6th Cir. 1996).
Marks v. United States, 161 U.S. 297 (1896).
Mathews v. Diaz, 426 U.S. 67 (1976). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cc.36819761513
McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316 (1819).
McLellan v. Mississippi Power & Light Co., 545 F.2d 919 (5th Cir. 1977) (en banc).
Medellin v. Texas, 552 U.S. 491 (2008).
Miller v. The Resolution, 2 U.S. (2 Dall.) 19 (Ct. App. in Cases of Capture 1781).
Mitchell v. Laird, 488 F.2d 611 (D.C. Cir. 1973). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.2.5866.611
Montoya v. United States, 180 U.S. 261 (1901).
Moyer v. Peabody, 212 U.S. 78 (1909).
National Council of Resistance of Iran v. Albright, 251 F.3d 192 (D.C. Cir. 2001).
The Nereide, 13 U.S. (9 Cranch) 388, 3 L.Ed. 769 (1815).
Padilla ex rel. Newman v. Bush, 233 F.Supp.2d 564 (S.D.N.Y. 2002).
Padilla v. Hanft, 389 F.Supp.2d 678 (D.S.C. 2005).
Padilla v. Hanft, 423 F.3d 386 (4th Cir. 2005).
Padilla v. Rumsfeld, 352 F.3d 695 (2nd Cir. 2003).
Pan Am. World Airways, Inc. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., 505 F.2d 989 (2nd Cir. 1974).
The Paquete Habana, 175 U.S. 677 (1900).
People’s Mojahedin Org. of Iran v. U.S. Dep’t of State, 182 F.3d 17 (D.C. Cir. 1999).
Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982).
Rasul v. Bush, 542 U.S. 466 (2004).
Rasul v. Myers, 563 F.3d 527 (D.C. Cir. 2009). DOI: https://doi.org/10.4016/10712.01
Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957).
Rodriguez de Quijas v. Shearson/American Express, Inc., 490 U.S. 477 (1989).
Ross v. McIntyre, 140 U.S. 453 (1891).
Russell v. Commissioner, 678 F.2d 782 (9th Cir. 1982).
Russian Volunteer Fleet v. United States, 282 U.S. 481 (1931).
Shaughnessy v. Mezei, 345 U.S. 206 (1953). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00000542-195303000-00015
Sosa v. Alvarez‑Machain, 542 U.S. 692 (2004).
Spaulding v. Douglas Aircraft Co., 154 F.2d 419 (9th Cir. 1946).
Sutton v. Tiller, 46 Tenn. 593, 98 Am.Dec. 471, 1869 WL 2594 (1869).
Talbot v. Seeman, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 1 (1801).
Tel‑Oren v. Libyan Arab Republic, 726 F.2d 774 (D.C. Cir. 1984).
Texas Co. v. State ex rel. Coryell, 180 P.2d 631, 198 Okla. 565 (1945).
The Three Friends, 166 U.S. 1 (1897).
United States v. 129 Packages, 27 F.Cas. 284 (C.C.E.D.Mo. 1806) (No. 15,941).
United States v. Fort, 921 F.Supp. 523 (N.D. Ill. 1996).
United States v. Lindh, 212 F.Supp.2d 541 (E.D.Va. 2002).
United States v. Noriega, 808 F.Supp. 791 (S.D. Fla. 1992).
United States v. Rahman, 189 F.3d 88 (2nd Cir. 1999).
United States v. Smith, 27 F.Cas. 1192 (C.C.D.N.Y. 1806) (No. 16,342).
United States v. Verdugo‑Urquidez, 494 U.S. 259 (1990).
Verano v. De Angelis Coal Co., 41 F.Supp. 954 (M.D. Pa. 1941).
Vermilya‑Brown Co. v. Connell, 335 U.S. 377 (1948). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1948.10483268
Warafi v. Obama, 409 Fed.Appx. 360 (D.C. Cir. 2011).
Whitney v. Robertson, 124 U.S. 190 (1888).
Wong Wing v. United States, 163 U.S. 228 (1896).
Woods v. Interstate Realty Co., 337 U.S. 535 (1949).
Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356 (1886).
Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952).
Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001).
Pisma procesowe
Appendix to the Petition for Certiorari, Rasul v. Bush, Docket No. 03‑343, 542 U.S. 466 (U.S. 2003), 2 IX 2003.
Brief for Louis Henkin et al. as Amici Curiae, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, No. 05‑184, 548 U.S. 557 (U.S. 2006).
Brief for Petitioner‑Appellant, Al‑Bihani v. Obama, No. 09‑5051, 590 F.3d 866 (D.C. Cir. 2010).
Brief for the Petitioner, Rumsfeld v. Padilla, No. 03‑1027, 542 U.S. 426 (2004), 17 III 2004.
Brief for the Respondents, Boumediene v. Bush, Nos. 06‑1195, 06‑1196, 553 U.S. 723 (2008), 9 X 2007.
Brief for the Respondents, Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, Docket No. 03‑6696, 542 U.S. 507 (2004), 29 III 2004.
Brief for United States, Rasul v. Bush, Docket No. 03‑334, 542 U.S. 466 (U.S. 2004), 3 III 2004.
Brief of Amici Curiae International Law Professors Listed Herein in Support of Petitioner, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, No. 05‑184, 548 U.S. 557 (U.S. 2006), 5 I 2006.
Brief of Amici Curiae Senators John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Kelly Ayotte in Support of Appellants, Hedges v. Obama, Nos. 12‑3176, 12‑3644, 2012 WL 3999839 (2nd Cir. 2012), 13 XI 2012.
Respondents’ Memorandum Regarding the Government’s Detention Authority Relative to Detainees Held at Guantanamo Bay (Docket #1690), In re: Guantanamo Bay Detainee Litigation, Misc. No. 08‑442
(TFH), 616 F.Supp.2d 63 (D.D.C. 2009), 13 III 2009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0507.1970.tb01206.x
Transcript of Oral Argument, Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, No. 03‑6696, 542 U.S. 507 (2004), 28 IV 2004.
Unclassified Brief for the Appellees, Al‑Bihani v. Obama, No. 09‑5051, 590 F.3d 866 (D.C. Cir. 2010).
Projekty ustaw
Enemy Belligerent Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act, 111th Cong., S. 3081 (2010).
Enemy Belligerent Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act, 111th Cong., H.R. 4892 (2010).
Enemy Combatant Detention Review Act of 2008, 110th Cong., S. 3401 (2008).
Detainee Security Act of 2011, 112th Cong., H.R. 968 (2011).
National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2011, 112th Cong., H.R. 1540 (2011).
National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2011, 112th Cong., S. 1867 (2011).
Military Detainee Procedures Improvement Act of 2011, 112th Cong., S. 551 (2011).
Terrorist Detention Review Reform Act, 111th Cong., S. 3707 (2010).
Inne źródła
Akerman A. T., Unlawful Traffic with Indians, 13 Op. Att’y Gen. 470 (1871).
Bellinger III, J. B., Legal Issues in the War on Terrorism, Address at the London School of Economics, London, 31 X 2006.
Bush G. W., Letter to Congressional Leaders Reporting on Combat Action in Afghanistan against al Qaida Terrorists and Their Taliban Supporters, 9 X 2001, 107th Cong., 1st Sess., 2001 Week. Comp. Pres. Doc. 1447.
Butler B. F., Existence of War with the Seminoles, 3 Op. Att’y Gen. 307 (1838).
Bybee J. S., Determination of Enemy Belligerency and Military Detention, 26 Op. O.L.C., 2002 WL 34482990 (8 VI 2002) (preliminary print).
Bybee J. S., Re: Application of Treaties and Laws to al Qaeda and Taliban Detainees, Memorandum for A. R. Gonzales, Counsel to the President, and W. J. Haynes II, General Counsel of the Department of Defense (O.L.C. 22 I 2002) (unpublished opinion).
Bybee J. S., Re: The President’s Power as Commander in Chief to Transfer Captured Terrorists to the Control and Custody of Foreign Nations, 26 Op. O.L.C., 2002 WL 34482991 (13 III 2002) (preliminary print).
Executive Office of the President, Statement of Administration Policy on H.R. 1540, 24 V 2011, [online] http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/legislative/sap/112/saphr1540_20110524.pdf.
Hamilton A., The Federalist No. 23 (1788), [w:] The Federalist, red. G. W. Carey, J. McClellan, Indianapolis 2001.
Hamilton A., The Federalist No. 34 (1788), [w:] The Federalist, red. G. W. Carey, J. McClellan, Indianapolis 2001.
Harmon J. M., Presidential Power to Use the Armed Forces Abroad without Statutory Authorization, 4A Op. O.L.C. 185 (1980).
House Armed Services Committee Press Release, 8 III 2011, [online] http://armedservices.house.gov/index.cfm/files/serve?File_id=b8435f9f‑9a0b‑4608‑a410‑de8ca8dfa602.
House Committee on Armed Services, Report to Accompany H.R. 6054 (Military Commissions Act of 2006), together with the Additional and Dissenting Views, H.R. Rep. No. 109‑664, Part 1, 15 IX 2006, 109th Cong., 1st Sess.
House Rules and Manual, 112th Congress, red. J. V. Sullivan, H. Doc. No. 111‑157, 112th Cong., 1st Sess. (2012).
Implications of the Supreme Court’s Boumediene Decision for Detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, Hearing Before the House Committee on Armed Services, H.A.S.C. No. 110‑166, 110th Cong., 2nd Sess. (30 VII 2008).
Koh H. H., Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State, The Obama Administration and International Law, Annual Meeting of the American Society of International Law, Washington, 25 III 2010, [online] http://www.state.gov/s/l/releases/remarks/139119.htm.
Lee Ch., Treason, 1 Op. Att’y Gen. 84 (1798).
Lieber F., Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States in the Field, U.S. War Dep’t, General Order No. 100 (24 IV 1863), Washington 1898.
Lincoln A., Proclamation Calling Forth the Militia and Convening an Extra Session of Congress, 12 Stat. 1258 (15 IV 1861).
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, Final Report, Washington 2004, [online] http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO‑911REPORT/pdf/GPO‑911REPORT.pdf.
Philbin P. F., Legality of the Use of Military Commissions to Try Terrorists, 25 Op. O.L.C., 2001 WL 36175681 (6 XI 2001) (preliminary print).
Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, Report on the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, S. Exec. Rep. 102‑23, 102nd Cong., 1st Sess., 31 I.L.M. 645 (1993).
Speed J., Reply of the Attorney General to the Resolution of the Senate Relative to the Prosecution of Jefferson Davis for Treason, 11 Op. Att’y Gen. 411 (1866).
U.S. Department of State, United States Responses to Selected Recommendations of the Human Rights Committee (2007).
Williams G. H., The Modoc Indian Prisoners, 14 Op. Att’y Gen. 249 (1873).
Yoo J. C., Applicability of 18 U.S.C. § 4001(a) to Military Detention of United States Citizens, 26 Op. O.L.C., 2002 WL 34482988 (27 VI 2002) (preliminary print).
Yoo J. C., The President’s Constitutional Authority to Conduct Military Operations against Terrorists and Nations Supporting Them, 25 Op. O.L.C., 2001 WL 34726560 (25 IX 2001) (preliminary print).
Yoo J. C., Delahunty R. J., Authority for Use of Military Force to Combat Terrorist Activities within the United States, 25 Op. O.L.C., 2001 WL 36190674 (23 X 2001) (preliminary print).
Przedmiotowa
Abramowitz D., The President, the Congress, and Use of Force: Legal and Political Considerations in Authorizing Use of Force against International Terrorism, „Harvard International Law Journal” 2002, Vol. 43.
Baker Jr. J. S., A War, Yes; against Terror, No, „Michigan State Journal of International Law” 2010, Vol. 19.
Baty T., Morgan J. H., War. Its Conduct and Legal Results, London 1915.
Bellia Jr. A. J., Clark B. R., The Federal Common Law of Nations, „Columbia Law Review” 2009, Vol. 109.
Bellinger III J. B., A Counterterrorism Law in Need of Updating, „Washington Post” 2010, 26 XI, [online] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp‑dyn/content/article/2010/11/25/.html. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8322.2010.00760.x
Bellinger III J. B., Padmanabhan V. M., Detention Operations in Contemporary Conflicts: Four Challenges for the Geneva Conventions and Other Existing Law, „American Journal of International Law” 2011, Vol. 105, [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.5305/amerjintelaw.105.2.0201. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1734922
Blackstone W., Commentaries on the Laws of England (1765‑1769), red. G. Sharswood, B. Field, Philadelphia 1893. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oseo/instance.00248899
Bradley C. A., Chevron Deference and Foreign Affairs, „Virginia Law Review” 2000, Vol. 86, [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1073844. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1073844
Bradley C. A., Goldsmith J. L., Congressional Authorization and the War on Terrorism, „Harvard Law Review” 2005, Vol. 118.
Bradley C. A., Goldsmith J. L., Customary International Law as Federal Common Law: A Critique of the Modern Position, „Harvard Law Review” 1997, Vol. 110, [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1342230. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1342230
Bradley C. A., Goldsmith J. L., Foreign Relations Law. Cases and Materials, New York 2009.
Bynkershoek C. van, Quaestionum juris publici libri duo (1737), Oxford 1930, Classics of International Law, 14. Publications of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Division of International Law.
Carnahan B. M., In re Medina: Are the 1949 Geneva Conventions Self‑Executing?, „Air Force Law Review” 1987, Vol. 26.
Cerone J., Misplaced Reliance on the „Law of War”, „New England Journal of International and Comparative Law” 2007, Vol. 14.
Chesney R. M., Who May be Held? Military Detention through the Habeas Lens, „Boston College Law Review” 2011, Vol. 52.
Chesney R. M., Goldsmith J. L., Terrorism and the Convergence of Criminal and Military Detention Models, „Stanford Law Review” 2008, Vol. 60.
Coke E., Institutes of the Laws of England, in Four Parts (1628‑1644), London 1794‑1797.
Davis K. C., An Approach to Problems of Evidence in the Administrative Process, „Harvard Law Review” 1942, Vol. 55, [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1335092. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1335092
Einspanier K. L., Burlamaqui, the Constitution, and the Imperfect War on Terror, „Georgetown Law Journal” 2008, Vol. 96.
Elsea J. K., Grimmett R. F., Declarations of War and Authorizations for the Use of Military Force. Historical Background and Legal Implications, CRS Report for Congress RL31133, Washington 2011.
Falkoff M. D., Knowles R., Bagram, Boumediene, and Limited Government, „DePaul Law Review” 2010, Vol. 59.
Fallon R. H. [i in.], Hart and Wechsler’s The Federal Courts and the Federal System, New York 2003, University Casebook Series.
Federal Procedure. Lawyers Edition, St. Paul 1981‑2013 (wersja elektroniczna dostępna w systemie Westlaw).
Fischer M. P., Applicability of the Geneva Conventions to „Armed Conflict” in the War on Terror, „Fordham International Law Journal” 2007, Vol. 30.
Fisher L., Presidential War Power, Lawrence 2004.
Garcia M. J. [i in.], Closing the Guantanamo Detention Center. Legal Issues, CRS Report for Congress R40139, Washington 2011.
Garraway Ch., Afghanistan and the Nature of Conflict, [w:] The War in Afghanistan. A Legal Analysis, red. M. N. Schmitt, Newport 2009, International Law Studies, 85.
Garrett B. L., Habeas Corpus and Due Process, „Cornell Law Review” 2012, Vol. 98.
Geltzer J. A., Decisions Detained: The Court’s Embrace of Complexity in Guantanamo‑Related Litigation, „Berkeley Journal of International Law” 2010, Vol. 29.
Geltzer J. A., Of Suspension, Due Process, and Guantanamo: The Reach of the Fifth Amendment after Boumediene and the Relationship between Habeas Corpus and Due Process, „University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law” 2012, Vol. 14.
Goldsmith J. L., The Terror Presidency. Law and Judgment inside the Bush Administration, New York 2007.
Goodman R., Jinks D., International Law, U.S. War Powers, and the Global War on Terrorism, „Harvard Law Review” 2005, Vol. 118.
Gorman S. D., In the Wake of Tragedy: The Citizens Cry Out for War, but Can the United States Legally Declare War on Terrorism?, „Penn State International Law Review” 2003, Vol. 21.
Grimmett R. F., Authorization for Use of Military Force in Response to the 9/11 Attacks (P.L. 107‑40). Legislative History, CRS Report for Congress RS22357, Washington 2006.
Grotius H., The Rights of War and Peace (De iure belli ac pacis, libri tres; 1620), red. R.Tuck, Indianapolis 2005.
Hafetz J., Calling the Government to Account: Habeas Corpus in the Aftermath of Boumediene, „Wayne Law Review” 2011, Vol. 57. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1972542
Hale M., Historia placitorum coronae. The History of the Pleas of the Crown (1736), red. S. Emlyn, E. Ingersoll, W. A. Stokes, Philadelphia 1847.
Hawkins W., A Treatise of the Pleas of the Crown (1716), red. J. Curwood, London 1824, Making of Modern Law.
Henkin L., Foreign Affairs and the United States Constitution, Oxford–New York 1996. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198260981.001.0001
Henkin L., International Law as Law in the United States, „Michigan Law Review” 1984, Vol. 82, [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1288495. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1288495
Hertz R., Liebman J. S., Federal Habeas Corpus Practice and Procedure, New Providence 2011.
Hollander B. N., The President and Congress – Operational Control of the Armed Forces. „Military Law Review” 1965, Vol. 27.
Hyde Ch. Ch., International Law, Chiefly as Interpreted and Applied by the United States, Boston 1922.
Preux J. de, Siordet F., Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War.
Commentary, przeł. A. P. de Heney, Geneva 1960, The Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, red. J. S. Pictet, t. 3.
Jinks D., September 11 and the Laws of War, „Yale Journal of International Law” 2003, Vol. 28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.391640
Jinks D., Sloss D., Is the President Bound by the Geneva Conventions?, „Cornell Law Review” 2004, Vol. 90.
Katz S. N., A New American Dilemma? U.S. Constitutionalism vs. International Human Rights, „University of Miami Law Review” 2003, Vol. 58.
Keitner Ch. I., Rights beyond Borders, „Yale Journal of International Law” 2011, Vol. 36.
Killian J. H., Costello G. A., Thomas K. R. [i in.], The Constitution of the United States of America. Analysis and Interpretation. Analysis of Cases Decided by the Supreme Court of the United States to June 28, 2002, Washington 2004, Senate Documents, 108‑17.
Klein A., Wittes B., Preventive Detention in American Theory and Practice, „Harvard National Security Journal” 2011, Vol. 2.
Koch Ch. H., Administrative Law and Practice, Eagan 2010.
Koh H. H., Is International Law Really State Law?, „Harvard Law Review” 1998, Vol. 111. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1342484
Kuhn W. E., The Terrorist Detention Review Reform Act: Detention Policy and Political Reality, „Seton Hall Legislative Journal” 2011, Vol. 35.
Lewis G. G., Mewha J., History of Prisoner of War Utilization by the United States Army, 1776‑1945, Washington 1955, Dep’t of the Army Pamphlet, 20‑213.
Lobel J., The Use of Force to Respond to Terrorist Attacks: The Bombing of Sudan and Afghanistan, „Yale Journal of International Law” 1999, Vol. 24.
Marcinko M., „Status terrorysty” w świetle międzynarodowego prawa humanitarnego, [w:] Walka z terroryzmem w świetle prawa międzynarodowego, red. K. Lankosz, M. Chorośnicki, P. Czubik, Bielsko‑Biała 2005.
McGinnis J. O., Losing the Law War: The Bush Administration’s Strategic Errors, „Georgia State University Law Review” 2008, Vol. 25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1010354
Mortlock D., Definite Detention: The Scope of the President’s Authority to Detain Enemy Combatants, „Harvard Law & Policy Review” 2010, Vol. 4.
Murphy R., Radsan A. J., Due Process and Targeted Killing of Terrorists, „Cardozo Law Review” 2009, Vol. 31.
Murphy S. D., Decision Not to Regard Persons Detained in Afghanistan as POWs, „American Journal of International Law” 2002, Vol. 96, [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2693945. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2693945
Nanda V. P., Pansius D. K., Litigation of International Disputes in U.S. Courts, Eagan 2005 (wersja elektroniczna dostępna w systemie Westlaw) (suplement 2013).
Nesbitt N. H., Meeting Boumediene’s Challenge: The Emergence of an Effective Habeas Jurisprudence and Obsolescence of New Detention Legislation, „Minnesota Law Review” 2010, Vol. 95.
Neuman G. L., The Extraterritorial Constitution after Boumediene v. Bush, „Southern California Law Review” 2009, Vol. 82.
Operational Law Handbook, red. S. Condron, Charlottesville 2011.
Oppenheim L. F. L., International Law, t. 2: War and Neutrality, London 1906.
Parks W. H., Combatants, [w:] The War in Afghanistan. A Legal Analysis, red. M. N. Schmitt, Newport 2009, International Law Studies, 85.
Paulsen M. S., Youngstown Goes to War, „Constitutional Commentary” 2002, Vol. 19.
Paust J. J., War and Enemy Status after 9/11: Attacks on the Laws of War, „Yale Journal of International Law” 2003, Vol. 28.
Posner E. A., Sunstein C. R., Chevronizing Foreign Relations Law, „Yale Law Journal” 2007, Vol. 116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/20455756
Priester B. J., Terrorist Detention: Directions for Reform, „University of Richmond Law Review” 2009, Vol. 43.
Ramsey M. D., The Constitution’s Text in Foreign Affairs, Cambridge (Mass.) 2007.
Restatement of the Law, Third: Foreign Relations Law of the United States, Philadelphia 1987.
Rosas A., The Legal Status of Prisoners of War. A Study in International Humanitarian Law Applicable in Armed Conflicts, Helsinki 1976, Annales Academiae Scientiarum Fennicae.
Dissertationes Humanarum Litterarum, 9.
Rotunda R. D., Nowak J. E., Treatise on Constitutional Law. Substance and Procedure, St. Paul 2007.
Shumate B. E., New Rules for a New War: The Applicability of the Geneva Conventions to al Qaeda and Taliban Detainees Captured in Afghanistan, „New York International Law Review” 2005, Vol. 18.
Solum, L. B., Stare Decisis, Law of the Case, and Judicial Estoppel, [w:] Moore’s Federal Practice, red. D. R. Coquillette [i in.], t. 18, New York 2007.
Sparrow T. L., Indefinite Detention after Boumediene: Judicial Trailblazing in Uncharted and Unfamiliar Territory, „Suffolk University Law Review” 2011, Vol. 44.
Sprout H. H., Theories as to the Applicability of International Law in the Federal Courts of the United States, „American Journal of International Law” 1931, Vol. 26, [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2189349. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2189349
Stern R. L., Gressman E., Supreme Court Practice, Washington 2002.
Stromseth J. E., Understanding Constitutional War Powers Today: Why Methodology Matters, „Yale Law Journal” 1996, Vol. 106, [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/797312. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/797312
Turns D., The Treatment of Detainees and the „Global War on Terror”: Selected Legal Issues, [w:] International Law and Military Operations, red. M. D. Carsten, Newport 2008, International Law Studies, 84. Vattel E. de, The Law of Nations, or, the Principles of Law of Nature (1758), red. B. Kapossy, R. Whatmore, Indianapolis 2008, Natural Law and Enlightenment Classics.
Vazquez C. M., The Four Doctrines of Self‑Executing Treaties, „American Journal of International Law” 1995, Vol. 89, [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2203933. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2203933
Vladeck S. I., The D.C. Circuit after Boumediene, „Seton Hall Law Review” 2011, Vol. 41.
Vladeck S. I., Insular Thinking about Habeas, „Iowa Law Review Bulletin” 2012, Vol. 97.
Vladeck S. I., Lederman, M. S., The NDAA: The Good, the Bad, and the Laws of War – Part II, Lawfare, 31 XII 2011, [online] http://www.lawfareblog.com/2011/12/the‑ndaa‑the‑good‑the‑bad‑and‑the‑laws‑of‑war‑part‑ii/.
Wallach E. J., Partisans, Pirates, and Pancho Villa: How International and National Law Handled Non‑State
Fighters in the „Good Old Days” before 1949 and that Approach’s Applicability to the „War on Terror”, „Emory International Law Review” 2010, Vol. 24.
Wedgwood R., Responding to Terrorism: The Strikes against bin Laden, „Yale Journal of International Law” 1999, Vol. 24.
Weingarten J., The Detention of Enemy Combatants Act, „Harvard Journal on Legislation” 2006, Vol. 43.
Weisburd A. M., The Executive Branch and International Law, „Vanderbilt Law Review” 1988, Vol. 41.
Winthrop W., Military Law and Precedents, Washington 1920, Document (United States. War Department), 1001.
Wittes B., Chesney R. M., Reynolds L., The Emerging Law of Detention 2.0. The Guantánamo Habeas Cases as Lawmaking, Governance Studies at Brookings, Washington 2012, [online] http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/reports/ /5/guantanamo%20wittes/05_guantanamo_wittes.pdf. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1839793
Wittes B., House‑Senate Side‑by‑Side of NDAA Provisions: Part I, Lawfare, 7 XII 2011, [online] http://www.lawfareblog.com/2011/12/house‑senate‑side‑by‑side‑of‑ndaa‑provisions‑part‑i/.
Wittes B., Klaidman Post #1: Where that March 13 Brief Came From, Lawfare, 10 VI 2012, [online] http://www.lawfareblog.com/2012/06/klaidman‑post‑1‑where‑that‑march‑13‑brief‑came‑from/.
Wormuth F. D., Firmage E. B., To Chain the Dog of War. The War Power of Congress in History and Law, Urbana 1989.
Wright Ch. A., Miller A. R., Federal Practice and Procedure, St. Paul 1969‑2012.
Young E. A., Sorting Out the Debate over Customary International Law, „Virginia Journal of International Law” 2002, Vol. 42.
Zeisberg M. A., War Powers. The Politics of Constitutional Authority, Princeton 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23943/princeton/9780691157221.001.0001
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
