Munaf v. Geren
2008 United States Supreme Court case / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dear Wikiwand AI, let's keep it short by simply answering these key questions:
Can you list the top facts and stats about Munaf v. Geren?
Summarize this article for a 10 year old
Munaf v. Geren, 553 U.S. 674 (2008), is a United States Supreme Court case where the court unanimously concluded that the habeas corpus statute, 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c)(1), extends to U.S. citizens held overseas by American forces subject to an American chain of command, even if acting as part of a multinational coalition. But, it found that habeas corpus provided the petitioners with no relief, holding that "Habeas corpus does not require the United States to shelter such fugitives from the criminal justice system of the sovereign with authority to prosecute them."
Munaf v. Geren | |
---|---|
Argued March 25, 2008 Decided June 12, 2008 | |
Full case name | Mohammad Munaf, et al. v. Pete Geren, Secretary of the Army, et al. and Pete Geren, Secretary of the Army, et al. v. Sandra K. Omar and Ahmed S. Omar as next friends of Shawqi Ahmad Omar |
Citations | 553 U.S. 674 (more) 128 S. Ct. 2207; 171 L. Ed. 2d 1 |
Case history | |
Prior | Judgment for plaintiffs, injunction granted, Omar v. Harvey, 479 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2007); judgment for respondents, injunction denied, Munaf v. Harvey, 482 F.3d 582 (D.C. Cir. 2007). |
Holding | |
Habeas corpus statute extends to American citizens held overseas by American forces operating subject to an American chain of command, even when those forces are acting as part of a multinational coalition; however, petitioners state no claim in their habeas petitions for which relief can be granted | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Roberts, joined by unanimous |
Concurrence | Souter, joined by Ginsburg, Breyer |
The case dealt specifically with the appeals from Mohammad Munaf and Shawqi Ahmad Omar, both naturalized citizens of the United States held by MNF-I, specifically American, forces in Iraq. In its arguments, the US government relied heavily upon Hirota v. MacArthur (1948), a case in which the Supreme Court found it lacked original jurisdiction over citizens of Japan being held by the Allied Powers for the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal because "the tribunal sentencing [the petitioners] [was] not a tribunal of the United States."