obaydullah v. obama (D.C. Cir. June 18, 2010)

* Obaydullah v. Obama (D.C. Cir. June 18, 2010)

A DC Circuit panel (Ginsburg, joined by Griffith and Williams) has reversed a district court determination that Obaydullah’s habeas petition should remain stayed pending military commission proceedings. The panel emphasizes that though charges were sworn against Obaydullah back in September 2008, the Convening Authority has not yet referred those charges for actual prosecution. At the end of the 10-page opinion, the panel notes that if the charges finally do get referred for prosecution, this might re-raise the question of whether the habeas court should abstain pending the outcome of that proceeding. The full opinion is posted here.

By Robert M. Chesney

Robert M. Chesney is Charles I. Francis Professor in Law at UT-Austin School of Law. Chesney is a national security law specialist, with a particular interest in problems associated with terrorism. Professor Chesney recently served in the Justice Department in connection with the Detainee Policy Task Force created by Executive Order 13493. He is a member of the Advisory Committee of the American Bar Association's Standing Committee on Law and National Security, a senior editor for the Journal of National Security Law & Policy, an associate member of the Intelligence Science Board, a non-resident senior fellow of the Brookings Institution, a term member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and a member of the American Law Institute. Professor Chesney has published extensively on topics ranging from detention and prosecution in the counterterrorism context to the states secrets privilege. He served previously as chair of the Section on National Security Law of the Association of American Law Schools and as editor of the National Security Law Report (published by the American Bar Association's Standing Committee on Law and National Security). His upcoming projects include two books under contract with Oxford University Press, one concerning the evolution of detention law and policy and the other examining the judicial role in national security affairs.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *