Appeals Court Strikes at 'Enemy Combatant' Policy

A federal appeals court says President Bush does not have the constitutional authority to imprison a U.S. resident indefinitely and without charge, as in the case of Ali al-Marri. Al-Marri is a citizen of Qatar who was attending graduate school in Illinois when he was arrested in 2001.

Copyright © 2007 NPR. For personal, noncommercial use only. See Terms of Use. For other uses, prior permission required.

MICHELE NORRIS, host:

From NPR News, this is ALL THINGS CONSIDERED. I'm Michele Norris.

ROBERT SIEGEL, host:

And I'm Robert Siegel.

A federal court says the government has no right to hold a legal immigrant as an enemy combatant. The federal appeals court in Richmond, Virginia issued that ruling today. It is a major blow to Bush administration policy.

The case involves an immigrant named Ali al-Marri, who has been in a military prison for four years. Now, the court says, he must be charged as a criminal suspect, deported or released.

NPR's Ari Shapiro reports.

ARI SHAPIRO: There are some court opinions that quietly draw a line in the sand on an important issue. Others bring in the bulldozers. This is the latter. Writing for the majority in this two-to-one decision, Judge Diana Gribbon Motz says, in the case at hand, the president claims power that far exceeds that granted him by the Constitution.

She says that for a court to side with the government in this case would effectively undermine all of the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution. The case is about whether the president can take an immigrant who's in the United States designate him an enemy combatant and hold him indefinitely in a military prison without trial or access to a lawyer.

The defendant is the last enemy combatant being held in the United States. His name is Ali al-Marri. He legally came to the U.S. with his family the day before 9/11. He was pursuing a master's degree in Peoria, Illinois when the government picked him up and accused him of being an al-Qaida sleeper agent. Today, al-Marri is in a military brig in South Carolina.

The court today said that if the government's allegations against al-Marri are true, then the man is deplorable, criminal and potentially dangerous, but he is a civilian nonetheless. The judge has said the president can no more order the military to detain al-Marri than he can order the military to detain the Unabomber or the men responsible for the Oklahoma City bombings.

Mr. DAVID RIFKIN (Former Justice Department Lawyer): This is a willful, stupid, idiotic opinion without any basis in law.

SHAPIRO: David Rifkin worked in the Justice Department and the White House under past Republican presidents.

Mr. RIFKIN: They are saying very boldly. If you are fighting on behalf of a non-state actor, you cannot be an enemy combatant.

SHAPIRO: The Justice Department today said it's disappointed with the decision and plans to appeal to the entire Fourth Circuit. Judge Motz never says this outright, but the opinion suggests that the United States is not at war with al-Qaida.

Bobby Chesney teaches National Security Law at Wake Forrest University Law School.

Professor BOBBY CHESNEY (National Security Law, Wake Forrest University Law School): She says that many points out to the opinion that the linchpin of combatant status is affiliation with the military arm of an enemy government, an enemy state.

SHAPIRO: So Taliban fighters could be enemy combatants but not al-Qaida fighters. Human rights and civil liberties groups see this decision as a long overdue presidential smackdown that recognizes the basic right of everybody in the United States to due process. Jonathan Hafetz is al-Marri's lawyer.

Mr. JONATHAN HAFETZ (Associate Counsel, Liberty & National Security Project): All we've been asking for from the beginning is this fundamental right of all people in this country to be charged and tried if the government suspects them of wrongdoing and not to hold them incommunicado, in solitary confinement, without charge, without evidence and without a trial.

SHAPIRO: The opinion also sent a shot across the bow to Congress. And this part of the opinion was unanimous. Last year, Congress passed a law called the Military Commissions Act. Part of that law eliminates habeas corpus, the right to challenge one's detention for enemy combatants being held in the U.S., people like al-Marri.

Today, the court said Congress cannot take away al-Marri's right to habeas corpus because, quote, "as an alien captured and detained within the United States, he has a right to habeas corpus protected by the Constitution's suspension clause." Chesney says this part of the opinion may not have a huge impact.

Prof. CHESNEY: It's a question that only impacts him currently. In theory, it could come up with other people but it's been a few years. We've seen a lot of indictments but we haven't seen other people put into military custody in the U.S.

SHAPIRO: Still, Congress is considering a bill that would restore habeas corpus rights to enemy combatants in the United States and at Guantanamo and this court ruling could give the legislation a boost.

Ari Shapiro, NPR News, Washington.

Copyright © 2007 NPR. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to NPR. This transcript is provided for personal, noncommercial use only, pursuant to our Terms of Use. Any other use requires NPR's prior permission. Visit our permissions page for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by a contractor for NPR, and accuracy and availability may vary. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Please be aware that the authoritative record of NPR's programming is the audio.

Court: U.S. Terror Suspects Have Legal Rights

A U.S. resident cannot be detained indefinitely without charge under the Military Commissions Act, a divided federal appeals court ruled Monday in a decision that could be a blow to the Bush administration's strategy for fighting the war on terror.

In the 2-1 decision, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel found that the federal Military Commissions Act doesn't strip Ali al-Marri, whom authorities suspect of being an al-Qaida operative, of his constitutional right as a legal U.S. resident to challenge his accusers in court.

"To sanction such presidential authority to order the military to seize and indefinitely detain civilians, even if the president calls them 'enemy combatants,' would have disastrous consequences for the constitution — and the country," the court panel said.

Al-Marri has been held in solitary confinement in the Navy brig in Charleston, S.C., since June 2003. The Qatar native has been detained since his December 2001 arrest at his home in Peoria, Ill. He had moved there with his wife and five children a day before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to study for a master's degree at Bradley University.

"A person who commits a crime should be punished, but when a civilian protected by the due process clause commits a crime, he is subject to charge, trial and punishment in a civilian court, not to seizure and confinement by military authorities," the court said.

The court ruled that the government must allow al-Marri, currently the only U.S. resident held as an enemy combatant within the U.S., to be released from military detention.

Jose Padilla, another U.S. citizen, was held as an enemy combatant in a Navy brig for 3.5 years before he was added to an existing case in Miami in November 2005.

Al-Marri's lawyers argued that the Military Commissions Act, passed last fall to establish military trials after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling, doesn't repeal the writ of habeas corpus – a defendant's traditional right to challenge detention.

From NPR reports and The Associated Press

Comments

 

Please keep your community civil. All comments must follow the NPR.org Community rules and terms of use, and will be moderated prior to posting. NPR reserves the right to use the comments we receive, in whole or in part, and to use the commenter's name and location, in any medium. See also the Terms of Use, Privacy Policy and Community FAQ.