|
Rasul V. Rumsfeld
Shafiq Rasul, Asif Iqbal, Ruhal Ahmed, and Jamal Al-Harith, four former Guantánamo Bay detainees, filed suit in 2004 in the United States District Court in Washington, DC against former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. They charged that illegal interrogation tactics were permitted to be used against them by Secretary Rumsfeld and the military chain of command. The plaintiffs each sought seek compensatory damages for torture and arbitrary detention while being held at Guantánamo.”Rasul v. Rumsfeld” Center for Constitutional Rights, 6 March 2008, accessed 2 January 2013 Some aspects of the case were dismissed at the District Court level, and the Appeals Court overturned the lower court ruling on coverage of religious protections. In 2008 the United States Supreme Court granted '' [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Shafiq Rasul
Shafiq Rasul (born 15 April 1977) is a British citizen who was a detainee held at Guantanamo Bay by the United States, which treated him an unlawful combatant. His detainee ID number was 86. His family discovered his detention when the British Foreign Office contacted them on 21 January 2002. He was released in March 2004, shortly after his return to the United Kingdom, more than three months before ''Rasul v. Bush'' was decided. In August 2004, Rasul, Asif Iqbal, and Ruhal Ahmed, all from Tipton - and known as the 'Tipton Three' - compiled a report on their abuse and humiliation while in US custody. In ''Rasul v. Rumsfeld'', plaintiffs Rasul, Asif Iqbal, Ruhal Ahmed, and Jamal Al-Harith, four former Guantánamo Bay detainees, sued former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. They charge that illegal interrogation tactics were permitted to be used against them by Secretary Rumsfeld and the military chain of command. The Hague Justice Portal gives access to the official Co ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Supreme Court Of The United States
The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is the highest court in the federal judiciary of the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all U.S. federal court cases, and over state court cases that involve a point of federal law. It also has original jurisdiction over a narrow range of cases, specifically "all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party." The court holds the power of judicial review, the ability to invalidate a statute for violating a provision of the Constitution. It is also able to strike down presidential directives for violating either the Constitution or statutory law. However, it may act only within the context of a case in an area of law over which it has jurisdiction. The court may decide cases having political overtones, but has ruled that it does not have power to decide non-justiciable political questions. Established by Article Three of the United States ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Qualified Immunity
In the United States, qualified immunity is a legal principle that grants government officials performing discretionary (optional) functions immunity from civil suits unless the plaintiff shows that the official violated "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known". It is a form of sovereign immunity less strict than absolute immunity that is intended to protect officials who "make reasonable but mistaken judgments about open legal questions", extending to "all fficialsbut the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law". Qualified immunity applies only to government officials in civil litigation, and does not protect the government itself from suits arising from officials' actions. The U.S. Supreme Court first introduced the qualified immunity doctrine in ''Pierson v. Ray'' (1967), a case litigated during the height of the civil rights movement. It is stated to have been originally introduced with the rati ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Subject Matter Jurisdiction
Subject-matter jurisdiction (also called jurisdiction ''ratione materiae')'' is the authority of a court to hear cases of a particular type or cases relating to a specific subject matter. For instance, bankruptcy court only has the authority to hear bankruptcy cases. Subject-matter jurisdiction must be distinguished from personal jurisdiction, which is the power of a court to render a judgment against a particular defendant, and territorial jurisdiction, which is the power of the court to render a judgment concerning events that have occurred within a well-defined territory. Unlike personal or territorial jurisdiction, lack of subject-matter jurisdiction cannot be waived. A judgment from a court that did not have subject-matter jurisdiction is forever a nullity. To decide a case, a court must have a combination of subject (''subjectam'') and either personal (''personam'') or territorial (''locum'') jurisdiction. Subject-matter jurisdiction, personal or territorial jurisdictio ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
United States District Court For The District Of Columbia
The United States District Court for the District of Columbia (in case citations, D.D.C.) is a federal district court in the District of Columbia. It also occasionally handles (jointly with the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii and the High Court of American Samoa) federal issues that arise in the territory of American Samoa American Samoa ( sm, Amerika Sāmoa, ; also ' or ') is an unincorporated territory of the United States located in the South Pacific Ocean, southeast of the island country of Samoa. Its location is centered on . It is east of the Internationa ..., which has no local federal court or United States territorial court, territorial court.https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-1124T U.S. Government Accountability Office. AMERICAN SAMOA: Issues Associated with Some Federal Court Options. September 18, 2008. Retrieved September 7, 2019. Appeals from the District are taken to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia C ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Religious Freedom Restoration Act
The Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, Pub. L. No. 103-141, 107 Stat. 1488 (November 16, 1993), codified at through (also known as RFRA, pronounced "rifra"), is a 1993 United States federal law that "ensures that interests in religious freedom are protected." The bill was introduced by Congressman Chuck Schumer ( D- NY) on March 11, 1993. A companion bill was introduced in the Senate by Ted Kennedy ( D- MA) the same day. A unanimous U.S. House and a nearly unanimous U.S. Senate—three senators voted against passage—passed the bill, and President Bill Clinton signed it into law. RFRA, as applied to the states, was held unconstitutional by the United States Supreme Court in the ''City of Boerne v. Flores'' decision in 1997, which ruled that the RFRA is not a proper exercise of Congress's enforcement power. However, it continues to be applied to the federal government—for instance, in '' Gonzales v. O Centro Espírita Beneficente União do Vegetal'' (2006) and '' Bu ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Geneva Conventions
upright=1.15, Original document in single pages, 1864 The Geneva Conventions are four treaties, and three additional protocols, that establish international legal standards for humanitarian treatment in war. The singular term ''Geneva Convention'' usually denotes the agreements of 1949, negotiated in the aftermath of the Second World War (1939–1945), which updated the terms of the two 1929 treaties and added two new conventions. The Geneva Conventions extensively define the basic rights of wartime prisoners (civilians and military personnel), established protections for the wounded and sick, and provided protections for the civilians in and around a war-zone; moreover, the Geneva Convention also defines the rights and protections afforded to non-combatants. The treaties of 1949 were ratified, in their entirety or with reservations, by 196 countries. The Geneva Conventions concern only prisoners and non-combatants in war; they do not address the use of weapons of war, whic ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Alien Tort Statute
The Alien Tort Statute ( codified in 1948 as ; ATS), also called the Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA), is a section in the United States Code that gives federal courts jurisdiction over lawsuits filed by foreign nationals for torts committed in violation of international law. It was first introduced by the Judiciary Act of 1789 and is one of the oldest federal laws still in effect in the U.S. The ATS was rarely cited for nearly two centuries after its enactment, and its exact purpose and scope remain debated.Stephen P. Mulligan''The Rise and Decline of the Alien Tort Statute'', Congressional Research Service (June 6, 2018). The U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted the Act's primary purpose as " romotingharmony in international relations by ensuring foreign plaintiffs a remedy for international-law violations in circumstances where the absence of such a remedy might provoke foreign nations to hold the United States accountable.". Since 1980, courts have generally interpreted the ATS to ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Due Process
Due process of law is application by state of all legal rules and principles pertaining to the case so all legal rights that are owed to the person are respected. Due process balances the power of law of the land and protects the individual person from it. When a government harms a person without following the exact course of the law, this constitutes a due process violation, which offends the rule of law. Due process has also been frequently interpreted as limiting laws and legal proceedings (see substantive due process) so that judges, instead of legislators, may define and guarantee fundamental fairness, justice, and liberty. That interpretation has proven controversial. Analogous to the concepts of natural justice and procedural justice used in various other jurisdictions, the interpretation of due process is sometimes expressed as a command that the government must not be unfair to the people or abuse them physically. The term is not used in contemporary English law, but t ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Inhuman Or Degrading Treatment
Cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment (CIDT) is treatment of persons which is contrary to human rights or dignity, but is not classified as torture. It is forbidden by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, the United Nations Convention against Torture and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Although the distinction between torture and CIDT is maintained from a legal point of view, medical and psychological studies have found that it does not exist from the psychological point of view, and people subjected to CIDT will experience the same consequences as survivors of torture. Based on this research, some practitioners have recommended abolishing the distinction. Inhuman treatment The Equality and Human Rights Commission defines inhuman treatment as: * serious physical assault * psychological interrogation * cruel detention conditions or restraints * physical or psychological abuse in a healthcare set ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Torture
Torture is the deliberate infliction of severe pain or suffering on a person for reasons such as punishment, extracting a confession, interrogation for information, or intimidating third parties. Some definitions are restricted to acts carried out by the state, but others include non-state organizations. Torture has been carried out since ancient times. In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, Western countries abolished the official use of torture in the judicial system, but torture continued to be used throughout the world. A variety of methods of torture are used, often in combination; the most common form of physical torture is beatings. Since the twentieth century, many torturers have preferred non-scarring or psychological methods to provide deniability. Torturers are enabled by organizations that facilitate and encourage their behavior. Most victims of torture are poor and marginalized people suspected of crimes, although torture against political prisoners or ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Joint Chiefs Of Staff
The Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) is the body of the most senior uniformed leaders within the United States Department of Defense, that advises the president of the United States, the secretary of defense, the Homeland Security Council and the National Security Council on military matters. The composition of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is defined by statute and consists of a chairman (CJCS), a vice chairman (VJCS), the service chiefs of the Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, Space Force, and the chief of the National Guard Bureau. Each of the individual service chiefs, outside their JCS obligations, work directly under the secretaries of their respective military departments, e.g. the secretary of the Army, the secretary of the Navy, and the secretary of the Air Force. Following the Goldwater–Nichols Act in 1986, the Joint Chiefs of Staff do not have operational command authority, either individually or collectively, as the chain of command goes from the president to the ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
.svg "Click for more on -> Joint Chiefs Of Staff")