Full text of "gov.uscourts.dcd.116163"

See other formats

Case 1 :05-cv-01458-UNA-AK Document 22 Filed 07/07/2006 Page 1 of 12 



IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 



Hicks (Rasul) v. Bush 
Al Odah v. United States 
Habib v. Bush 
Kurnaz v. Bush 



Khadr v. Bush 


) Case No. 


Begg v. Bush ] 


) Case No. 


Khalid (Benchellali) v. Bush 


) Case No. 


El-Banna v. Bush 


) Case No. 


Gherebi v. Bush ' 


) Case No. 


Boumediene v. Bush 


) Case No. 


Anam v. Bush 


) Case No. 


Almurbati v. Bush 


) Case No. 


Abdah v. Bush 


) Case No. 


Al-Qosi v. Bush 


) Case No. 


Paracha v. Bush 


) Case No. 


Al-Marri v. Bush ] 


) Case No. 


Zemiri v. Bush 


) Case No. 


Deghayes v. Bush 


) Case No. 


Mustapha v. Bush 


) Case No. 


Abdullah v. Bush 


) Case No. 



Al-Mohammed v. Bush 



Case No. 02-CV-0299 (CKK) 
Case No. 02-CV-0828 (CKK) 
Case No. 02-CV-1130 (CKK) 
Case No. 04-CV-1135 (ESH) 
04-CV-1136(JDB) 
04-CV-1137(RMC) 
04-CV-1142(RJL) 
04-CV-1144(RWR) 
04-CV-1164(RBW) 
04-CV-1166(RJL) 
04-CV-1194(HHK) 
04-CV-1227 (RBW) 
04-CV-1254 (HHK) 
04-CV-1937 (PLF) 
04-CV-2022 (PLF) 
04-CV-2035 (GK) 
04-CV-2046 (CKK) 
04-CV-2215 (RMC) 
05-CV-0022 (JR) 
05-CV-0023 (RWR) 
Case No. 05-CV-0247 (HHK) 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 22 Filed 07/07/2006 Page 2 of 1 2 



El-Mashad v. Bush 

Al-Adahi v. Bush 
Al-Joudi v. Bush 
Al-Wazan v. Bush 
Al-Anazi v. Bush 
Alhami v. Bush 
Ameziane v. Bush 
Batarfi v. Bush 
Sliti v. Bush 
Kabir v. Bush 
Qayed v. Bush 
Al-Shihry v. Bush 
Aziz v. Bush 
Al-Oshan v. Bush 
Tumani v. Bush 
Al-Oshan v. Bush 
Salahi v. Bush 



Mammar v. Bush 
Al-Sharekh v. Bush 
Magram v. Bush 
Al Rashaidan v. Bush 



Case No. 05-CV-0270 (JR) 
(Consolidated with 05-CV-833) 

Case No. 05-CV-0280 (GK) 

Case No. 05-CV-0301 (GK) 

Case No. 05-CV-0329 (PLF) 

Case No. 05-CV-0345 (JDB) 

Case No. 05-CV-0359 (GK) 

Case No. 05-CV-0392 (ESH) 

Case No. 05-CV-0409 (EGS) 

Case No. 05-CV-0429 (RJL) 

Case No. 05-CV-0431 (RJL) 

Case No. 05-CV-0454 (RMU) 

Case No. 05-CV-0490 (PLF) 

Case No. 05-CV-0492 (JR) 

Case No. 05-CV-0520 (RMU) 

Case No. 05-CV-0526 (RMU) 

Case No. 05-CV-0533 (RJL) 

Case No. 05-CV-0569 (JR) 
(Consolidated with 05-CV-0881) 
(Consolidated with 05-CV-0995) 

Case No. 05-CV-0573 (RJL) 

Case No. 05-CV-0583 (RJL) 

Case No. 05-CV-0584 (CKK) 

Case No. 05-CV-0586 (RWR) 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 22 Filed 07/07/2006 Page 3 of 1 2 



Mokit v. Bush 
Al Daini v. Bush 
Errachidi v. Bush 
Ahmed v. Bush 
Battayav v. Bush 
Adem v. Bush 
Aboassy v. Bush 
Hamlily v. Bush 
Imran v. Bush 
Al Habashi v. Bush 
Al Hamamy v. Bush 
Hamoodah v. Bush 
Khiali-Gul v. Bush 
Rahmattullah v. Bush 
Mohammad v. Bush 
Nasrat v. Bush 
Rahman v. Bush 
Bostan v. Bush 
Muhibullah v. Bush 
Mohammad v. Bush 
Wahab v. Bush 
Chaman v. Bush 
Gul v. Bush 



Case No. 05-CV-0621 (PLF) 
Case No. 05-CV-0634 (RWR) 
Case No. 05-CV-0640 (EGS) 
Case No. 05-CV-0665 (RWR) 
Case No. 05-CV-0714 (RBW) 
Case No. 05-CV-0723 (RWR) 
Case No. 05-CV-0748 (RMC) 
Case No. 05-CV-0763 (JDB) 
Case No. 05-CV-0764 (CKK) 
Case No. 05-CV-0765 (EGS) 
Case No. 05-CV-0766 (RJL) 
Case No. 05-CV-0795 (RJL) 
Case No. 05-CV-0877 (JR) 
Case No. 05-CV-0878 (CKK) 
Case No. 05-CV-0879 (RBW) 
Case No. 05-CV-0880 (ESH) 
Case No. 05-CV-0882 (GK) 
Case No. 05-CV-0883 (RBW) 
Case No. 05-CV-0884 (RMC) 
Case No. 05-CV-0885 (GK) 
Case No. 05-CV-0886 (EGS) 
Case No. 05-CV-0887 (RWR) 
Case No. 05-CV-0888 (CKK) 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 22 Filed 07/07/2006 Page 4 of 1 2 



Basardh v. Bush 
Nasrullah v. Bush 
Shaaban v. Bush 
Sohail v. Bush 
Tohirjanovich v. Bush 
Al Karim v. Bush 
Al-Khalaqi v. Bush 
Sarajuddin v. Bush 
Kahn v. Bush 
Mohammed v. Bush 
Mangut v. Bush 
Hamad v. Bush 
Khan v. Bush 
Zuhoor v. Bush 
Ali Shah v. Bush 
Salaam v. Bush 
Al-Hela v. Bush 
Mousovi v. Bush 
Khalifh v. Bush 
Zalita v. Bush 
Ahmed v. Bush 
Aminullah v. Bush 
Ghalib v. Bush 



Case No. 05-CV-0889 (ESH) 
Case No. 05-CV-0891 (RBW) 
Case No. 05-CV-0892 (CKK) 
Case No. 05-CV-0993 (RMU) 
Case No. 05-CV-0994 (JDB) 
Case No. 05-CV-0998 (RMU) 
Case No. 05-CV-0999 (RBW) 
Case No. 05-CV-1000 (PLF) 
Case No. 05-CV- 1001 (ESH) 
Case No. 05-CV-1002 (EGS) 
Case No. 05-CV- 1008 (JDB) 
Case No. 05-CV-1009 (JDB) 
Case No. 05-CV-1010 (RJL) 
Case No. 05-CV-1011 (JR) 
Case No. 05-CV-1012 (ESH) 
Case No. 05-CV-1013 (JDB) 
Case No. 05-CV- 1048 (RMU) 
Case No. 05-CV-1124 (RMC) 
Case No. 05-CV-1189 (JR) 
Case No. 05-CV-1220 (RMU) 
Case No. 05-CV- 1234 (EGS) 
Case No. 05-CV-1237 (ESH) 
Case No. 05-CV-1238 (CKK) 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 22 Filed 07/07/2006 Page 5 of 1 2 



Al Khaiy v. Bush 
Bukhari v. Bush 
Pirzai v. Bush 
Peerzai v. Bush 
Alsawam v. Bush 
Mohammadi v. Bush 
Al Ginco v. Bush 
Ullah v. Bush 
Al Bihani v. Bush 
Mohammed v. Bush 
Saib v. Bush 
Hatim v. Bush 
Al-Subaiy v. Bush 
Dhiab v. Bush 
Ahmed Doe v. Bush 
Sadkhan v. Bush 
Faizullah v. Bush 
Faraj v. Bush 
Khan v. Bush 
Ahmad v. Bush 
Amon v. Bush 
Al Wirghi v. Bush 
Nabil v. Bush 



Case No. 05-CV-1239 (RJL) 
Case No. 05-CV-1241 (RMC) 
Case No. 05-CV-1242 (RCL) 
Case No. 05-CV-1243 (RCL) 
Case No. 05-CV-1244 (CKK) 
Case No. 05-CV-1246 (RWR) 
Case No. 05-CV-1310 (RJL) 
Case No. 05-CV-1311 (RCL) 
Case No. 05-CV-1312 (RJL) 
Case No. 05-CV-1347 (GK) 
Case No. 05 -CV- 1353 (RMC) 
Case No. 05-CV-1429 (RMU) 
Case No. 05-CV-1453 (RMU) 
Case No. 05-CV-1457 (GK) 
Case No. 05-CV-1458 (ESH) 
Case No. 05 -CV- 1487 (RMC) 
Case No. 05 -CV- 1489 (RMU) 
Case No. 05-CV-1490 (PLF) 
Case No. 05-CV-1491 (JR) 
Case No. 05-CV-1492 (RCL) 
Case No. 05-CV-1493 (RBW) 
Case No. 05-CV-1497 (RCL) 
Case No. 05 -CV- 15 04 (RMC) 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 22 Filed 07/07/2006 Page 6 of 1 2 



Al Hawary v. Bush 
Shafiiq v. Bush 
Kiyemba v. Bush 
Idris v. Bush 

Attash v. Bush 
Al Razak v. Bush 
Mamet v. Bush 
Rabbani v. Bush 
Zahir v. Bush 

Akhtiar v. Bush 
Ghanem v. Bush 
Albkri v. Bush 
Al-Badah v. Bush 
Almerfedi v. Bush 
Zaid v. Bush 
Al-Bahooth v. Bush 
Al-Siba'i v. Bush 
Al-Uwaidah v. Bush 
Al-Jutaili v. Bush 
Ali Ahmed v. Bush 
Khandan v. Bush 
Kabir (Sadar Doe) v. Bush 



Case No. 05-CV-1505 (RMC) 

Case No. 05 -CV- 15 06 (RMC) 

Case No. 05-CV-1509 (RMU) 

Case No. 05-CV-1555 (JR) 
(Consolidated with 05-CV-1725) 

Case No. 05-CV-1592 (RCL) 

Case No. 05-CV-1601 (GK) 

Case No. 05-CV-1602 (ESH) 

Case No. 05-CV- 1607 (RMU) 

Case No. 05-CV-1623 (RWR) 
(Consolidated with 05-CV-01236) 

Case No. 05-CV-1635 (PLF) 

Case No. 05-CV-1638 (CKK) 

Case No. 05-CV- 1 639 (RBW) 

Case No. 05-CV- 1641 (CKK) 

Case No. 05-CV- 1645 (PLF) 

Case No. 05-CV-1646 (JDB) 

Case No. 05-CV- 1666 (ESH) 

Case No. 05-CV- 1667 (RBW) 

Case No. 05-CV- 1 668 (GK) 

Case No. 05-CV- 1 669 (TFH) 

Case No. 05-CV- 1 678 (GK) 

Case No. 05-CV- 1697 (RBW) 

Case No. 05-CV-1704 (JR) 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 22 Filed 07/07/2006 Page 7 of 1 2 



Al-Rubaish v. Bush 
Qasim v. Bush 
Sameur v. Bush 
Al-Harbi v. Bush 
Aziz v. Bush 
Hamoud v. Bush 
Al-Qahtani v. Bush 
Alkhemisi v. Bush 
Gamil v. Bush 
Al-Shabany v. Bush 
Othman v. Bush 
Ali Al Jayfi v. Bush 
Jamolivich v. Bush 
Al-Mudafari v. Bush 
Al-Mithali v. Bush 
Al-Asadi v. Bush 
Alhag v. Bush 
Nakheelan v. Bush 
Al Subaie v. Bush 
Ghazy v. Bush 
Al-Shimrani v. Bush 
Amin v. Bush 
Al Sharbi v. Bush 



Case No. 05-CV-1714 (RWR) 

Case No. 05-CV-1779 (JDB) 

Case No. 05-CV-1806 (CKK) 

Case No. 05-CV- 1857 (CKK) 

Case No. 05-CV- 1 864 (HHK) 

Case No. 05-CV- 1894 (RWR) 

Case No. 05-CV- 1 97 1 (RMC) 

Case No. 05-CV-1983 (RMU) 

Case No. 05-CV-2010 (JR) 

Case No. 05-CV-2029 (JDB) 

Case No. 05-CV-2088 (RWR) 

Case No. 05-CV-2104 (RBW) 

Case No. 05-CV-21 12 (RBW) 

Case No. 05-CV-2185 (JR) 

Case No. 05-CV-2186 (ESH) 

Case No. 05-CV-2197 (HHK) 

Case No. 05-CV-2199 (HHK) 

Case No. 05-CV-2201 (ESH) 

Case No. 05-CV-2216 (RCL) 

Case No. 05-CV-2223 (RJL) 

Case No. 05-CV-2249 (RMC) 

Case No. 05-CV-2336 (PLF) 

Case No. 05-CV-2348 (EGS) 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 22 Filed 07/07/2006 Page 8 of 1 2 



Ben Bacha v. Bush 
Zadran v. Bush 
Alsaaei v. Bush 
Razakah v. Bush 
Al Darbi v. Bush 
Haleem v. Bush 
Al-Ghizzawi v. Bush 
A wad v. Bush 
Al-Baidany v. Bush 
Al Rammi v. Bush 
Said v. Bush 
Al Halmandy v. Bush 
Mohammon v. Bush 
Al-Quhtani v. Bush 
Thabid v. Bush 
Al Yafie v. Bush 
Rimi v. Bush 
Almjrd v. Bush 
Al Salami v. Bush 
Al Shareef v. Bush 
Khan v. Bush 
Hussein v. Bush 
Al-Delebany v. Bush 



Case No. 05-CV-2349 (RMC) 

Case No. 05-CV-2367 (RWR) 

Case No. 05-CV-2369 (RWR) 

Case No. 05-CV-2370 (EGS) 

Case No. 05-CV-2371 (RCL) 

Case No. 05-CV-2376 (RBW) 

Case No. 05-CV-2378 (JDB) 

Case No. 05-CV-2379 (JR) 

Case No. 05-CV-2380 (CKK) 

Case No. 05-CV-2381 (JDB) 

Case No. 05-CV-2384 (RWR) 

Case No. 05-CV-2385 (RMU) 

Case No. 05-CV-2386 (RBW) 

Case No. 05-CV-2387 (RMC) 

Case No. 05-CV-2398 (ESH) 

Case No. 05-CV-2399 (RJL) 

Case No. 05-CV-2427 (RJL) 

Case No. 05-CV-2444 (RMC) 

Case No. 05-CV-2452 (PLF) 

Case No. 05-CV-2458 (RWR) 

Case No. 05-CV-2466 (RCL) 

Case No. 05-CV-2467 (PLF) 

Case No. 05-CV-2477 (RMU) 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 22 Filed 07/07/2006 Page 9 of 1 2 



Al-Harbi v. Bush ) Case No. 05-CV-2479 (HHK) 

NOTICE 

Respondents hereby provide notice regarding steps being taken in the wake of the 
Supreme Court's recent decision in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld;, 548 U.S. — , slip op. (U.S. June 29, 
2006), on the issue of whether the District Court may exercise jurisdiction over cases, such as 
those captioned above, pending on the date of enactment of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, 
Pub. L. No. 109-148, tit. X, 119 Stat. 2680 ("the Act"). 

The Act, among other things, amends 28 U.S.C. § 2241 to eliminate court jurisdiction to 
consider habeas petitions and other claims by aliens held as enemy combatants at Guantanamo 
Bay, id., § 1005(e)(1), and creates an exclusive review mechanism in the D.C. Circuit to address 
the validity of the detention of such aliens and final decisions of any military commissions, id., 
§ 1005(e)(1), (e)(2), (e)(3). Section 1005(e)(2) of the Act states that the D.C. Circuit "shall have 
exclusive jurisdiction to determine the validity of any final decision of a Combatant Status 
Review Tribunal that an alien is properly detained as an enemy combatant," and it further 
specifies the scope and intensiveness of that review. While the Supreme Court in Hamdan held 
that § 1005(e)(1) of the Detainee Treatment Act did not apply to habeas petitions pending prior 
to the enactment of the Act, it recognized that the exclusive review provisions of the Act did 
expressly apply to cases pending prior to enactment. Although the petitioner in Hamdan escaped 
the Act because his challenge did not involve a final decision of a military commission within the 
exclusive jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals under § 1005(e)(3), the Court reserved the 
question of the effect of the exclusive review provisions of the Act on other cases, stating that 

-1 - 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 22 Filed 07/07/2006 Page 1 of 1 2 

"[fjhere may be habeas cases that were pending in the lower courts at the time the DTA was 
enacted that do qualify as challenges to 'final decision[s]' within the meaning of subsection 
(e)(2) or (e)(3). We express no view about whether the DTA would require transfer of such an 
action to the District of Columbia Circuit." Hamdan, slip op. at 18, n.14. The above-captioned 
cases, to the extent they do not involve military commission claims, are such cases, i.e., 
challenges to petitioners' designation as enemy combatants through Combatant Status Review 
Tribunals. Given the Act's investment of exclusive review in the Court of Appeals, the District 
Court lacks jurisdiction over the cases for it is well-settled that an exclusive-review scheme, 
where applicable, precludes the exercise of jurisdiction under more general grants of jurisdiction, 
including habeas corpus. Cf., e.g., 5 U.S.C. § 703 ("form of proceeding for judicial review is the 
special statutory review proceeding relevant to the subject matter in a court specified by statute 
or, in the absence or inadequacy thereof, any applicable form of legal action, including actions 
for . . . writs of . . . habeas corpus"); Thunder Basin Coal Co. v. Reich, 510 U.S. 200, 207-09 
(1994) ("exclusive" jurisdiction under federal Mine Act precludes assertion of district court 
jurisdiction); FCC v. ITT World Communications, Inc., 466 U.S. 463, 468 (1984) (Hobbs Act) 
("The appropriate procedure for obtaining judicial review of the agency's disposition of these 
issues was appeal to the Court of Appeals as provided by statute."); Laing v. Ashcroft, 370 F.3d 
994, 999-1000 (9th Cir. 2004) ("§ 2241 is ordinarily reserved for instances in which no other 
judicial remedy is available"); Lopez v. Heinauer, 332 F.3d 507, 511 (8th Cir. 2003) ("Because 
judicial review was available . . . the district court was not authorized to hear this § 2241 habeas 
petition."). See also Telecommunications Research and Action Center v. FCC, 750 F.2d 70, 77 
(D.C. Cir. 1984) ("even where Congress has not expressly stated that statutory jurisdiction is 

-2- 



Case 1 :05-cv-01458-UNA-AK Document 22 Filed 07/07/2006 Page 1 1 of 12 

'exclusive' ... a statute which vests jurisdiction in a particular court cuts off original jurisdiction 
in other courts in all cases covered by that statute") (footnote omitted); id. at 75, 78-79 (request 
for relief in district court that might affect Court of Appeals' future, exclusive jurisdiction is 
subject to the exclusive review of the Court of Appeals). 

For these reasons, the Supreme Court's decision in Hamdan has not resolved the issue of 
whether this Court may exercise jurisdiction over the above-captioned cases in light of the Act, 
to the extent the cases do not involve military commission claims addressed by Hamdan. The 
effect of the Act on pending cases was addressed in supplemental briefing in the Guantanamo 
detainee appeals pending before the D.C. Circuit {Boumediene v. Bush, No. 05-5062, and Al 
Odah v. United States, No. 05-5064), 1 and respondents have recently requested that the Court of 
Appeals permit additional briefing on the effect of the Hamdan decision on this issue. 2 
Accordingly, respondents will continue to assert that a stay of proceedings in the above- 
captioned cases is appropriate pending the resolution of the effect of the Act by the D.C. Circuit. 3 
Dated: July 7, 2006 Respectfully submitted, 

PETER D. KEISLER 

Assistant Attorney General 



1 Oral argument before the D.C. Circuit was held on March 22, 2006. 

2 Petitioners in the cases involved in the appeals have opposed respondents' request for 
supplemental briefing. 

3 In addition, respondents will continue to assert that a stay remains appropriate for the 
separate and independent reason that the substantive issues in these cases, including whether 
petitioners have constitutional due process rights and, if so, whether the Combatant Status 
Review Tribunals satisfy any such rights, which were briefed and argued before the Court of 
Appeals prior to enactment of the Detainee Treatment Act, remain under consideration by the 
Court of Appeals. 

-3- 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 22 Filed 07/07/2006 Page 1 2 of 1 2 



DOUGLAS N. LETTER 
Terrorism Litigation Counsel 



/s/ Terry M. Henry 



JOSEPH H. HUNT (D.C. Bar No. 43 1 134) 

VINCENT M. GARVEY (D.C. Bar No. 127191) 

TERRY M. HENRY 

JAMES J. SCHWARTZ 

PREEYA M. NORONHA 

ROBERT J. KATERBERG 

NICHOLAS J. PATTERSON 

ANDREW I. WARDEN 

EDWARD H. WHITE 

MARC A. PEREZ 

Attorneys 

United States Department of Justice 

Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch 

20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W. 

Washington, DC 20530 

Tel: (202)514-4107 

Fax: (202)616-8470 



Attorneys for Respondents 



4-