I say they're entitled to due process because the Supreme Court says they're entitled to due process, in the case of Hamdi vs. Rehnquist.
a257.g.akamaitech.net
From the syllabus:
JUSTICE O’CONNOR, joined by THE CHIEF JUSTICE, JUSTICE
KENNEDY, and JUSTICE BREYER, concluded that although Congress
authorized the detention of combatants in the narrow circumstances alleged in this case, due process demands that a citizen held in the United States as an enemy combatant be given a meaningful opportunity to contest the factual basis for that detention before a neutral decisionmaker. Pp. 14–15.
JUSTICE SOUTER, joined by JUSTICE GINSBURG, concluded that Hamdi’s detention is unauthorized, but joined with the plurality to conclude that on remand Hamdi should have a meaningful opportu-nity to offer evidence that he is not an enemy combatant. Pp. 2–3, 15.
O’CONNOR, J., announced the judgment of the Court and delivered an opinion, in which REHNQUIST, C. J., and KENNEDY and BREYER, JJ., joined. SOUTER, J., filed an opinion concurring in part, dissenting in part, and concurring in the judgment, in which GINSBURG, J., joined. SCALIA, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which STEVENS, J., joined. THOMAS, J., filed a dissenting opinion.
***********
Notice the split. How that's going to shake down over time is anybody's guess, especially if O'Connor and/or Rehnquist retire. |
