subject
History, 19.05.2021 21:30 raebruh3154

In Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006), the Supreme Court considered whether it had jurisdiction under the Detainee Treatment Act (DTA) of 2005 to consider the habeas corpus petition of Salim Hamdan, who was being held at Guantanamo Bay. Although the dissent argued that the court did not have jurisdiction, a 6–3 majority Supreme Court decided that it did, and proceeded to rule on the merits. a) Suppose that the federal government wished to strip the Supreme Court of jurisdiction in all habeas corpus petitions of all individuals being held at Guantanamo Bay. Discuss what actions the president or Congress could take to do so. Discuss the potential basis for such power.

b) In the context of the scenario, discuss how such actions by the federal government would promote or interfere with the separation of powers, and discuss the potential constitutionality of any such actions.

ansver
Answers: 3

Another question on History

question
History, 22.06.2019 04:00
Which statement would most likely be made by an opponent of affirmative actions
Answers: 2
question
History, 22.06.2019 08:30
Word does jefferson use in opening of the second paragraph that means "obvious? "
Answers: 3
question
History, 22.06.2019 09:00
Which one of these was a consequence for farmers during the dust bowl
Answers: 1
question
History, 22.06.2019 10:30
One exception to the full faith and credit clause is that one state cannot enforce the civil law of another state is required to recognize marriages and divorces in another state cannot enforce the criminal law of another state is required to enforce the criminal law of another state
Answers: 3
You know the right answer?
In Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006), the Supreme Court considered whether it had jurisdiction under the Det...
Questions
question
Mathematics, 26.03.2021 02:30
Questions on the website: 13722363