Hostname: page-component-797576ffbb-k7d4m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2023-12-11T01:12:36.495Z Has data issue: false Feature Flags: { "corePageComponentGetUserInfoFromSharedSession": true, "coreDisableEcommerce": false, "useRatesEcommerce": true } hasContentIssue false

US Supreme Court, 29 June 2006, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 126 S Ct. 2749 (2006); 548 US — (2006).

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 December 2007

Fiona de Londras
Lecturer, Department and Faculty of Law, University College Cork (Ireland),
Get access


This casenote outlines and analyses the US Supreme Court's 2006 decision in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld. In this case the Court held that suspected terrorists held in Guantánamo Bay were entitled to bring habeas corpus petitions to federal courts and to the benefits of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. The US Supreme Court eschewed the tradition of judicial deference to overturn the President's determination that military commissions could be established without congressional approval in the circumstances of the ‘War on Terrorism’. The casenote goes on to consider the aftermath of this decision, including the introduction of the Military Commissions Act 2006, and the implications of this Act for the future of Guantánamo Bay litigation.

Judicial Decisions Involving Questions of Public International Law
Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)