Another individual held at Guantanamo Bay has launched a new round of challenges to his detention.
Latest in Detention: Law of: District Court Development
The Guantanamo detainee, as readers likely know, argued in a February motion that the end of the United States' war in Afghanistan, as recognized by President Obama, requires his release from Guantanamo. On Wednesday, Al-Warafi filed his reply brief on that issue. It opens as follows:
The response was filed on Friday, in the habeas case of Al-Warafi v. Obama. Have a look:
Such is this gist of this quite important Motion to Grant Petition For Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed last night by attorneys for Guantanamo detainee Mukhtar Yahia Naji al Warafi. His filing opens as follows:
Such is the gist of Judge Richard Roberts' order, issued yesterday in the context of the high-value Guantanamo detainee's habeas case in D.C. district court.
The opinion opens:
On Friday, Judge Gladys Kessler of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia denied detainee Abu Wa'el Dhiab's bid for a preliminary injunction against certain Guantanamo force-feeding procedures.
The court's memorandum opinion concludes as follows:
We continue with our coverage of a preliminary injunction hearing in the case of Guantanamo detainee and intermittent hunger-striker Abu Wa’El (Jihad) Dhiab.
Below you’ll find a read-out on the first of a three-day, preliminary injunction hearing in the case of Guantanamo detainee and intermittent hunger-striker Abu Wa’El (Jihad) Dhiab.
The First Amendment question in Judge Kessler’s opinion in support of her Order directing the videotapes of Abu Wa'el Dhiab's forced feedings to be unsealed (see Jane’s summary) is whether the public’s presumptive right of access is outweighed by the government’s well-specified “compelling interest” in keeping the classified tapes sealed.