Today's Boston Globe reports on one of the law firms representing Guantanamo detainees, pro bono here.
On June 12, 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion stating that the detainees have a right to a civil hearing under habeas corpus. The majority decision specifically states it does not address the government's claim that they have a right to hold them indefinitely without a hearing. In Boumediene v. Bush, Justice Kennedy, writing for the majority of himself, Souter, Ginsberg and Breyer, considers the separation of powers doctrine as a key element in reading the Suspension clause and deciding whether Congress supplied an adequate substitute for habeas corpus rights:
Our decision today holds only that the petitioners before us are entitled to seek the writ; that the DTA review procedures are an inadequate substitute for habeas corpus; and that the petitioners in these cases need not exhaust the review procedures in the Court of Appeals before proceeding with their habeas actions in the District Court. The only law we identify as unconstitutional is MCA section 7 (28 U.S.C.A. section 2241 (e) Supp 2007).
See the official slip opinion full text here. See the briefs in the case at the ABA website, by scrolling to Dec. 5, Boumediene here.