About this site

  • Comments
    When you submit a comment, it won't be published until approved. This is to cut down on comment spam. However, I will also edit or block comments that are profane or offensive.
  • No Legal Advice
    Although I may from time to time discuss legal issues on this blog, nothing that I post should be construed as legal advice, nor as creating an attorney-client relationship between you and me. In fact, there's a good chance I'm not licensed to practice law wherever you are. If you need legal advice, you should consult an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.
  • Personal View
    This blog is neither affiliated with my employer nor hosted by it. It is maintained through TypePad, and I pay the hosting fees. Nothing that is posted here should be construed as anything other than the views of the particular author of the post.
  • Tung Yin's Recent Papers (SSRN)

April 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30      


  • Check Google Page Rank

« Should I be ashamed to admit that I'd vote for the Donald? | Main | How necessary are TSA's new procedures? »

November 19, 2010


Matthew Lewis


Ghailani is accused of taking part in the 1998 US Embassy bombing in Libya. Does that fall under the AUMF? Under what authority would he be detained indefinitely?

Perhaps more importantly, is he any less likely to win a challenge to indefinite detention under the AUMF due to the unique circumstances of his crime than to his criminal verdict?

And finally, if his sentence is successfully appealed, I have no doubt that the DoJ would just hold him indefinitely as an enemy combatant anyway. So it's really not as if Cal appealed and won. It's more like Cal appealed and was declared winner, but Oregon stayed undefeated and Cal still had the loss on their record.

Tung Yin

There are some issues with the outer boundaries of the AUMF, such as whether people who knowingly donate to al Qaeda fall within its terms. But I don't think there's any question that Ghailani would fit within the "core" of al Qaeda and therefore within the "enemy" as defined by Congress.

I agree that the Obama Administration would simply continue to detain him even if he were to win his appeal. But doesn't that seem like a pretty bad outcome? It'll look like the trial was just a sham if it wouldn't affect Ghailani's ultimate disposition.

The comments to this entry are closed.