100% (1)
page:
6 pages/≈1650 words
Sources:
8
Style:
APA
Subject:
Social Sciences
Type:
Research Paper
Language:
English (U.S.)
Document:
MS Word
Date:
Total cost:
$ 31.1
Topic:

Civil Liberties, Habeas Corpus, and the War on Terro

Research Paper Instructions:
The final assignment for this course is a Final Paper. The purpose of the Final Paper is to give you an opportunity to apply much of what you have learned about American national government to an examination of civil liberties in the context of the war on terror. The Final Paper represents 20% of the overall course grade. Soon after the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, the Bush administration developed a plan for holding and interrogating captured prisoners. They were sent to a prison inside a U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, on land leased from the government of Cuba. Since 2002, over 700 men have been detained at "GITMO." Most have been released without charges or turned over to other governments. In 2011, Congress specifically prohibited the expenditure of funds to transfer GITMO prisoners to detention facilities in the continental United States, making it virtually impossible to try them in civilian courts. As of April 2012, 169 remained in detention at GITMO (Sutton, 2012). An assumption made by the Bush administration in selecting this location was that it was beyond the jurisdiction of U.S. courts. The administration wanted to avoid any judicial oversight of how it handled detainees, characterized as "enemy combatants." A possible legal challenge to indefinite detention with no formal charges or judicial proceedings might arise from the habeas corpus provision of the Constitution. Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution states, "The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it." Under this provision, persons detained by the government are entitled to a judicial hearing to determine if there is any legal basis for their detention. Some legal commentators refer to the right of habeas corpus as the "great writ of liberty" because it is a prisoner's ultimate recourse to an impartial judge who can review the possibility that he is being held illegally by the executive (e.g., the police or the military). In nations that do not honor habeas corpus, people simply disappear into prisons without ever having their day in court. Several controversial Supreme Court cases have come out of GITMO. One fundamental question that has been debated, but not clearly resolved, is to what extent the war on terror justifies the President's indefinite detention of "enemy combatants" without the possibility of the minimal judicial review protected by habeas corpus? Another issue in the debate is to what extent Congress must clearly authorize the President to conduct extra-judicial detentions in order for them to be legal? In 2008, the Supreme Court's decision in Boumediene v. Bush offered some answers to these questions. However, the deeply divided 5-4 Court and the likelihood of the protracted nature of the war on terror suggest that debate around these important questions will continue. Writing the Final Paper in this course will prepare you to participate intelligently as a citizen in this ongoing debate. Write an essay about the right of habeas corpus in the context of the war on terror. Your essay should address the following subtopics: The general meaning of the right of habeas corpus in the U.S. Constitution and its relationship to the protection of other civil liberties. The historical evolution of habeas corpus, including its English and American traditions. Examples from U.S. history of the "suspension" of habeas corpus and their applicability to the present. The relevance of habeas corpus to the contemporary U.S. situation during the war on terror, especially with respect to persons characterized by the President as "enemy combatants" or "illegal combatants." The U.S. Supreme Court's interpretation of the right of habeas corpus with respect to "enemy combatants" or "illegal combatants" (i.e., the views of the five justices making up the majority in Boumediene v. Bush as well as the views of the four dissenting justices). Your evaluation of various perspectives on this topic expressed by justices of the Supreme Court, leaders in other branches of government, and commentators in both the academic and popular media. Your assessment should consider several perspectives on this topic, including : The role of the President as commander-in-chief. The role of Congress in determining when habeas corpus can be "suspended." The role of the Supreme Court in protecting civil liberties, including the judicial philosophy which should guide the Court in this role, and Your personal philosophy, values or ideology about the balance between civil liberties and national security in the context of an unending war on terror. Follow these requirements when writing the Final Paper: The body of the paper (excluding the title page and reference page) must be at least 1,500 words long. The paper must start with a short introductory paragraph which includes a clear thesis statement. The thesis statement must tell readers what the essay will demonstrate. The paper must end with a short paragraph that states a conclusion. The conclusion and thesis must be consistent. The paper must logically develop the thesis in a way that leads to the conclusion, and that development must be supported by facts, fully explained concepts and assertions, and persuasive reasoning. The paper must address all subtopics outlined above. At least 20% of the essay must focus on subtopic 6, above (your evaluation of arguments about the topic). Your paper must cite at least three academic articles (excluding the course textbook) and at least four other kinds of sources (e.g., Supreme Court opinions, magazine or newspaper articles, the course textbook, and reliable websites or videos). Use your own words. While brief quotes from sources may be used, altogether the total amount of quoted text must be less than five percent of the body of your paper. When you use someone else's words, they must be enclosed in quotation marks followed by an APA in-text short citation – (Author, Year, page) – to your source. The in-text citation must correspond to a full APA citation for the source on the reference page at the end of the essay. When you express in your own words someone else's ideas, arguments or facts, your statement must be followed by an APA in-text short citation – (Author, Year, page) – to your source. The in-text citation must correspond to a full APA citation for the source in the reference page. The form of the title page, the body pages, and the reference page must comply with APA style. Additionally, the title page must include the course number and name, the instructor's name, and the date submitted. The paper must use logical paragraph and sentence transitions, complete and clear sentences, and correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation. For this paper you need to do research in peer-reviewed journals or other sources that are considered to have reliable information. In addition to your required course text, you need at least seven professional scholarly sources, three of which must be peer reviewed journal articles from the Ashford Online Library. Levin-Waldman, Oren M.. American Government. San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education, 2012. Print.
Research Paper Sample Content Preview:
Civil Liberties, Habeas Corpus, and the War on Terror Name: Course: Professor Name: (February, 2013) .  During wars and emergencies, Presidents claim extraordinary authority, and the exercise of executive power leads to asserted violations of constitutional rights and other legal norms. As disputes come to court, cries echo from one side that a ruling for the challengers would imperil national security and from the other that courts must hold our nation to the ideals that make its security worth preserving. In the context of war, separation-of-powers issues have most often come before the courts in their habeas corpus jurisdiction. Federman explains the Great Writ of habeas corpus as the procedural mechanism through which courts have insisted that the King, the President or any other executive official cannot impose detention except authorized by law (Federman, 2007). Where the writ runs, courts have the power and responsibility to enforce the most basic requirements of the rule of law, even in wartime. This paper seeks to expound the rights of Writ of habeas corpus in the context of the war on terror and its applicability today specifically in American context. According to Federman a writ of Habeas Corpus means a “body” that is being held has the right to be brought before the court and have the charges be stated that they are being held for. That is, no one should be held without a reason; you have to be charged with something to be detained. He goes further to say the right of writs of habeas corpus are granted in Article I, Section 9, clause 2 of the Constitution, which states, "The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it." This kind of petition can apply in many situations, including unlawful imprisonment and even family law involving custody of children (Federman, 2007). The Habeas Corpus has its origin from the American colonial masters, the British. They were used by the courts in the name of the monarch for the purpose of controlling smaller courts and the people under the king or queen. The superior court used this law to inquire on the detentions of individuals by the smaller courts. Towards the end of 16th Century, the detentions ordered by the King’s Privy Council (a body that exercised both executive and judicial functions) were also required to abide to this law. This was incorporated by the steps taken by the parliament to bring the King’s acts within its scope, culminating with the Habeas Corpus Act of 1679.18. During the colonial times British government expanded habeas corpus to all its colonies, America included. The earliest constitutional guarantee of habeas corpus occurred in the United States in 1789. It is Federman view that the forefathers incorporated the England’s laws into the American laws which included the habeas corpus it has been an important legal instrument in safeguarding an individual’s freedom against an arbitrary state action and these men felt it was of upmost importance to include it in our nation’s founding groundwork. In addition, they loved the idea that all men should be equal under the law (Federman, 2008). Habeas corpus has continued to spread globally due to the influence of Anglo-American law and the inclusion of habeas corpus principles in post-World War II international and regional human rights instruments. The right to habeas corpus is now widely guaranteed in the constitutions of nations from a diverse array of legal traditions. Habeas corpus is a critical safeguard against the arbitrary imprisonment of any person. In the words of Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase quoted by Federman notes, “The great writ of habeas corpus has been for centuries esteemed the best and only sufficient defense of personal freedom” (Federman, 2008). Another crucial thing to note about habeas corpus is the fact that it does not only ensure a detainee is brought before a judge bit it also ensures the physical integrity of the detainee. According to Latimer the American Constitution is very clear on the suspension of the right of habeas corpus. It states: “unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.” In American history there are few incidents when the president in power has been able to suspend this Act of the constitution with the approval of the house of congress. These incidents include; during the Civil War by the president then, Abraham Lincoln, and also during the Bush administration as a result of the threats and the dangers of terrorism (Latimer, 2011). More than 100 years back president Lincoln suspended the constitutionally bestowed right of writs of habeas corpus and on October 17, 2006 president Bush Junior did the same. They based their arguments on dangers of war but they suffered great opposition from the American people who saw this act as a way of attacking their constitution. However, in their view they acted in line with powers given to them under the same constitution as Commander in Chief of the U.S. Military during a time of war. Lincoln was facing an internal rebellion which was armed while Bush was responding to the dangers and acts of the today’s global terrorism. President Bush actions was triggered by the ever terrorists attacks in history within the American soil, the september11, 2001 attack. Lincoln suspended the habeas corpus rights of U.S. citizens. The Military Commissions Act of 2006, signed by President Bush, stipulates that the right of habeas corpus should be denied only to aliens "detained by the United States (Latimer, 2011) This so called suspension whether limited or not of the people’s right that is granted by the American constitution is crucial and therefore should only happen in terrible and unanticipated of situations. Yes the tow circumstance under which Lincoln and Bush suspended these rights is terrible but Latimer is of the view that their warranted suspension is actually for debate (Latimer, 2011). For instan...
Updated on
Get the Whole Paper!
Not exactly what you need?
Do you need a custom essay? Order right now:

👀 Other Visitors are Viewing These APA Essay Samples:

Sign In
Not register? Register Now!