United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit · Constitutional Law
Constitutional LawHabeas CorpusSuspension ClauseExtraterritorial Application of Constitutional ProtectionsMilitary DetentionBagramAfghanistanenemy combatants
Facts
Three noncitizen detainees held as unlawful enemy combatants at the Bagram Theater Internment Facility in Afghanistan sought habeas relief from federal court. Bagram is a U.S.-used military base in Afghanistan operated under an agreement with Afghanistan, but Afghanistan remains the host sovereign and the country is an active theater of war subject to repeated attacks. The detainees' status was determined through Unlawful Enemy Combatant Review Boards, which the court described as affording less protection than the Combatant Status Review Tribunals discussed in Boumediene. The government moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction under § 7(a) of the Military Commissions Act.
Issue
Whether federal courts have habeas jurisdiction, consistent with the Suspension Clause as interpreted in Boumediene, over petitions filed by noncitizen detainees held by the United States at Bagram Air Force Base in Afghanistan despite MCA § 7(a).
Rule
Under Boumediene, the reach of the Suspension Clause to noncitizens held outside the United States depends on objective factors and practical concerns rather than formal sovereignty alone. At least three factors are relevant: (1) the detainee's citizenship and status and the adequacy of the process used to determine that status; (2) the nature of the sites of apprehension and detention; and (3) the practical obstacles inherent in resolving the prisoner's entitlement to the writ.
🔒
See the holding & full analysis
Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.
The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case
One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.
Rashid Karim, a Moroccan national, is held by the U.S. military at a large detention compound near Mosul, Iraq, on land used under an agreement with Iraq. His status was determined by a nonadversarial review board that provides fewer protections than the process formerly used at Guantanamo, and the surrounding region remains an active combat zone with recurring attacks on the base.
If Rashid files a habeas petition in federal court, which is the strongest prediction under the governing functional test?
Explanation. The majority applies Boumediene's functional three-factor test: (1) citizenship/status and adequacy of process, (2) nature of the apprehension and detention sites, and (3) practical obstacles. Even when the first factor favors the detainee because the status process is less protective, the second and especially third factors can defeat habeas where detention is in an active theater of war, on the territory of another sovereign, and judicial review risks interference with military operations. The opinion rejects any rule that inadequate process alone is dispositive. (Derived from Maqaleh v. Gates (n.d.).)