|
 |
|
|
12/8/2004
Over 70 professors, attorneys, law students and alums were on hand for a recent discussion held at Jenner & Block’s Chicago office on Rasul v. Bush, the 2004 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held that federal courts have jurisdiction over challenges brought by alleged “enemy combatants” detained at the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba naval facility.
The event, presented by the Edwin F. Mandel Legal Aid Clinic and the MacArthur Justice Center of the University of Chicago Law School, raised a variety of complex issues still being debated in the aftermath of the High Court’s controversial decision.
“The Rasul decision marks the first time the Court has found it necessary to insert itself into the on-going administration of the war power, a position that became necessary because of the unlimited reach of the Executive’s position,” said Joseph Margulies, an attorney with the MacArthur Justice Center and the lead counsel for the petitioners in Rasul.
To implement Rasul, the federal court in the District of Columbia will hold hearings to determine whether the detentions are lawful. But, Mr. Margulies said, Rasul also raises questions about federal court jurisdiction at other facilities around the world.
“There should be no prison beyond the law,” he said in his remarks. “If the Executive refuses to extend the protections of the law to detention facilities other than Guantanamo, or if it uses Rasul as an incentive to imprison people elsewhere, the Court may again be forced to intervene.”
Mr. Margulies was joined in the discussion by Leah Epstein and Melissa Chiang, two MacArthur Justice Center students who assisted Mr. Margulies in his work on Rasul.
Ms. Epstein said that the Rasul decision perhaps highlights a broader trend in the federal judiciary of attempting to check any apparent growth in federal power. She also commented on the need for the courts to further explore the practical implications of Rasul at a time when there is no immediate end in sight to the government’s detention process.
Ms. Chiang recalled her role in leading a team of law students researching international law to see whether that would be of any aid to Mr. Margulies’ work on the Rasul brief. In that process, she traced the role of the courts in military affairs going back to the so-called Thirty Years’ War, the series of European conflicts lasting from 1618 to 1648, through the legal issues raised during the U.S. Civil War. She said that although the High Court did not reference international law in its Rasul decision, she believed that it had an effect on the Justices’ ruling.
Mark J. Heyrman, Director of Clinical Programs at the University of Chicago Law School, provided the luncheon’s opening remarks. He was introduced by Associate Courtney M. Beemer, who organized and hosted the event at the Firm along with Partners David J. Bradford and C. Steven Tomashefsky.
Mr. Bradford is a founding attorney of the MacArthur Justice Center and currently serves as the Center’s General Counsel. Mr. Bradford also led a Jenner & Block legal team to file an amicus brief in the Rasul case on behalf of several retired judges arguing for the Guantanamo Bay detainees' right to challenge their detention.
For the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Rasul v. Bush, as well related briefs from the parties and amicus briefs filed with the Court, please visit the Firm’s online resource center at: http://www.jenner.com/gitmo.
Pictured, top (from left): Ms. Beemer, Mr. Tomashefsky, Mr. Margulies, Ms. Epstein and Ms. Chiang.
Pictured, below: Mr. Margulies, Ms. Epstein and Ms. Chiang discuss Rasul v. Bush.
|
|
Print This Page
