Human Rights and the War on Terrorism: The Bush Administration's Treatment of Alleged Enemy Combatants and the United States Judiciary's Reaction Thereupon - Softcover

In the war on terrorism, does the United States Judiciary fulfill its critical function to guarantee compliance by the Executive with the political norms and ideals of human rights codified both in the United States Constitution and International Law? This study examines the means by which policies such as the Bush Administration applies in the war on terrorism can be achieved in the United States system of government. It focuses on the legal concepts affected by the Bush Administration's treatment of alleged enemy combatants after September 11, 2001 by analyzing three lawsuits filed with United States Courts. The three cases-Rumsfeld v. Padilla, Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, and Rasul v. Bush-so far have been the only cases reviewed by the highest court of the nation, the United States Supreme Court.