Home › Case briefs › Constitutional Law

Rasul v. Bush

Supreme Court of the United States · 2004 · Constitutional Law

Constitutional LawHabeas CorpusFederal JurisdictionExecutive DetentionGuantanamo Bayhabeas corpus28 U.S.C. § 2241federal-question jurisdiction

Facts

Petitioners were 2 Australian citizens and 12 Kuwaiti citizens captured abroad during hostilities between the United States and the Taliban and held by the U.S. military at Guantanamo Bay beginning in early 2002. They alleged that they had never been combatants against the United States, had never engaged in terrorist acts, had not been charged with wrongdoing, and had not been allowed access to counsel, courts, or any tribunal. The United States occupies Guantanamo Bay under agreements with Cuba providing that Cuba retains ultimate sovereignty while the United States exercises complete jurisdiction and control over the base. Petitioners sought habeas relief and, in the Kuwaiti detainees' case, also invoked federal-question and Alien Tort Statute jurisdiction.

Issue

Whether federal courts lack jurisdiction to consider challenges to the legality of the detention of foreign nationals captured abroad and held at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base. More specifically, whether 28 U.S.C. § 2241 confers jurisdiction over their habeas petitions and whether Eisentrager bars their statutory claims.

Rule

Section 2241 confers district court jurisdiction to hear habeas petitions from persons who allege they are held in federal custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States, so long as the court has jurisdiction over the custodians; the detainee's presence within the district is not required. That jurisdiction extends to aliens detained at Guantanamo Bay because the United States exercises complete jurisdiction and control there, and Eisentrager does not bar such statutory jurisdiction.

🔒

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

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

Three Algerian nationals are held by the U.S. military at a naval installation in Cuba over which the United States exercises complete jurisdiction and control under a long-term lease, though Cuba retains ultimate sovereignty. Their relatives file habeas petitions in federal district court in Washington, D.C., alleging the men have never been charged, given counsel, or brought before any tribunal, and the court can obtain service on the Secretary of Defense and the base commander.

Should the district court dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction because the detainees are aliens held outside sovereign United States territory?

Explanation. The majority held that § 2241 confers jurisdiction where petitioners allege custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States and the court has jurisdiction over the custodians. Physical presence in the district is not required, and detention at a place under the United States' complete jurisdiction and control falls within the statute even if another nation retains ultimate sovereignty.