2013•SSRN Electronic JournalOpen access

The Eyes of the World: Charges, Challenges, and Guantánamo Military Commissions After Hamdan II

Christina M. Frohock

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

Guantanamo military commissions are under a spotlight, scrutinized by the judiciary and the public. Just the word “Guantanamo” can trigger impassioned reactions from both advocates and detractors. This Article takes a measured view, examining a 2012 opinion from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, Hamdan v. United States (“Hamdan II”), that speaks to the legitimacy of military commissions convened in Guantanamo to try the September 11th defendants and others. While several media commentators seized on the opinion as striking a blow to Guantanamo proceedings, in fact the opinion approves military commissions and offers a roadmap for prosecutors. After describing the history of Hamdan II, this Article shows how the opinion reaches terrorism cases in both military commissions and federal courts.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Guantanamo military commissions are under a spotlight, scrutinized by the judiciary and the public. Just the word “Guantanamo” can trigger impassioned reactions from both advocates and detractors. This Article takes a measured view, examining a 2012 opinion from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, Hamdan v. United States (“Hamdan II”), that speaks to the legitimacy of military commissions convened in Guantanamo to try the September 11th defendants and others. While several media commentators seized on the opinion as striking a blow to Guantanamo proceedings, in fact the opinion approves military commissions and offers a roadmap for prosecutors. After describing the history of Hamdan II, this Article shows how the opinion reaches terrorism cases in both military commissions and federal courts.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Guantanamo military commissions are under a spotlight, scrutinized by the judiciary and the public. Just the word “Guantanamo” can trigger impassioned reactions from both advocates and detractors. This Article takes a measured view, examining a 2012 opinion from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, Hamdan v. United States (“Hamdan II”), that speaks to the legitimacy of military commissions convened in Guantanamo to try the September 11th defendants and others. While several media commentators seized on the opinion as striking a blow to Guantanamo proceedings, in fact the opinion approves military commissions and offers a roadmap for prosecutors. After describing the history of Hamdan II, this Article shows how the opinion reaches terrorism cases in both military commissions and federal courts.

Key concepts: Law, Political science, Habeas corpus, Terrorism, Legitimacy, Public opinion, Geneva Conventions, International law

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The Eyes of the World: Charges, Challenges, and Guantánamo Military Commissions After Hamdan II — Research Paper | ScholarLens