U.S. Can Hold Citizens As Combatants


WASHINGTON - A federal appeals court ruled Wednesday that the government can hold U.S. citizens as enemy combatants during wartime without the constitutional protections afforded Americans in criminal prosecutions.

In overturning a lower court ruling, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (news - web sites) in Richmond, Va., said the status of 21-year-old Yaser Esam Hamdi as a citizen did not change the fact he was captured in Afghanistan (news - web sites) while fighting alongside Taliban and al-Qaida fighters.

"Judicial review does not disappear during wartime, but the review of battlefield captures in overseas conflicts is a highly deferential one" to the government, the judges wrote.
Attorney General John Ashcroft (news - web sites) hailed the decision, calling it "an important victory for the president's ability to protect the American people in times of war."

"Detention of enemy combatants prevents them from rejoining the enemy and continuing to fight against America and its allies, and has long been upheld by our nation's courts, regardless of the citizenship of the enemy combatant," Ashcroft said in a statement.

Hamdi was captured in Afghanistan in November 2001 after a prison uprising by suspected Taliban and al-Qaida members. He was transported along with hundreds of other alleged enemy soldiers to a prison at the U.S. Navy (news - web sites) base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

It was discovered Hamdi had been born in Louisiana to Saudi parents, who later returned with their son to Saudi Arabia.

He has been held in a naval brig in Norfolk, Va., since April.

Hamdi's case is seen by some as a major legal test case to determine the government's ability to hold citizens without access to a lawyer or the courts. If Hamdi can be imprisoned in a military jail with few of the constitutional protections afforded Americans facing criminal prosecution, critics say, then other U.S. citizens could be similarly held.

A federal judge in Norfolk, Va., agreed, ruling in August that Hamdi should at least have a right to a lawyer and a chance to see the government's evidence against him.

The circuit court agreed that the case raises serious questions about the rights of citizens but concluded that, in wartime, the government's authority is supreme in deciding who may be held indefinitely.

Hamdi, the judges said, was "squarely within the zone of active combat" when captured and is being lawfully detained. The courts, they added, have only limited authority to intervene in such national security matters.

"Any effort to ascertain the facts concerning the petitioner's conduct while amongst the nation's enemies would entail an unacceptable risk of obstructing war efforts authorized by Congress and undertaken by the executive branch," the 54-page opinion said.


___