Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Habeas Corpus in WartimeFrom the Tower of London to Guantanamo Bay$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Amanda L. Tyler

Print publication date: 2017

Print ISBN-13: 9780199856664

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: November 2017

DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780199856664.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2019. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. date: 15 October 2019



(p.277) Conclusion
Habeas Corpus in Wartime

Amanda L. Tyler

Oxford University Press

The book concludes by arguing that the current state of American habeas jurisprudence should trouble anyone who cares about the Constitution. As the chapters of the book reveal, the War on Terror Supreme Court decision in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld and the World War II internment of Japanese Americans stand entirely at odds with everything the Founding generation sought to achieve with the Suspension Clause. Specifically, the origins and long-standing interpretation of the Suspension Clause understood it to prohibit the government, in the absence of a valid suspension, from detaining persons who can claim the protection of domestic law outside the criminal process, even in wartime.

Keywords:   Habeas corpus, Suspension Clause, Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, Japanese American internment, Alexander Hamilton

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .