Facts of Padilla vs. Rumsfeld Case, Ex Parte Quirin Case, and Hamdi vs. Rumsfeld Case

913 Words4 Pages
Padilla v. Rumsfeld Facts for Padilla v. Rumsfeld In Padilla v. Rumsfeld, an American citizen was arrested in Chicago as he stepped off an airplane. Federal authorities received a tip that he was planning on conducting a terrorist attack using a dirty bomb. However, they did not have enough evidence to arrest him on the charge of terrorism and was subsequently held as a material witness. He was transferred to military custody and was sent to a prison in South Carolina. Over the next several years, his attorney's sued to the federal government alleging that he was being held without due process of law. In 2012, the Supreme Court denied to hear the case. They referred the matter back to US Court of Appeals. They dismissed the case, based upon the fact that the plaintiff's attorneys named Rumsfeld as the defendant. Instead, they should have named the military commander of the prison as the defendant. This means that the government can still hold onto Padilla and that his attorneys will have to re file using the proper procedures. ("Padilla v. Rumsfeld," 2012) Fact for Ex Parte Quirin The case involving Ex Parte Quirin involves an American citizen who returns to the US during World War II. His mission was to conduct sabotage and terrorist related activities inside the United States. In 1942, he was arrested and charged with providing support to the enemy. He appealed his decision to the US Supreme Court claiming that he was entitled to have his case heard in a civilian

More about Facts of Padilla vs. Rumsfeld Case, Ex Parte Quirin Case, and Hamdi vs. Rumsfeld Case

Open Document