“The military commission convened to try Hamdan lacks the power to proceed because its structure and procedures violate both the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the four Geneva Conventions signed in 1949. ... The Executive ought to be allowed wide latitude in wartime, but that latitude does not extend to the creation of military tribunals that bypass the established laws of war and the explicit statutory boundaries set by Congress.”
— Justice John Paul Stevens, majority opinion in *Hamdan v. Rumsfeld* (2006)
The Supreme Court decision excerpted above was most directly a response to which of the following developments during the War on Terror?
- The expansion of presidential authority to detain and prosecute suspected enemy combatants.Answer
- BThe shift toward preemptive military action against nation-states suspected of harboring weapons of mass destruction.
- CThe reorganization of domestic intelligence-sharing agencies under the Department of Homeland Security.
- DThe suspension of constitutional protections for domestic citizens under the USA PATRIOT Act.
Answer
The expansion of presidential authority to detain and prosecute suspected enemy combatants.
The correct answer is correct because the Supreme Court's ruling in *Hamdan v. Rumsfeld* (2006) was a direct constitutional challenge to the Bush administration's expansion of executive power. The administration had established military commissions via executive order to detain and prosecute suspected terrorists (labeled as enemy combatants) at Guantanamo Bay. The Court ruled that the executive branch could not unilaterally establish these tribunals without congressional authorization or in violation of international law (the Geneva Conventions).
Step-by-Step Solution
Key Concept
Debates over the balance of power and civil liberties during the War on Terror, specifically concerning executive authority and the treatment of detainees.