Padilla v. Rumsfeld
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
352 F.3d 695 (2003)
- Written by Abby Roughton, JD
Facts
The United States government suspected Jose Padilla (plaintiff), an American citizen, of being involved with al-Qaeda. In May 2002, Padilla was arrested in Chicago and held as a material witness in connection with a grand-jury investigation into the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. In June 2002, President George W. Bush issued an executive order designating Padilla as an enemy combatant and directing US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld (defendant) to detain Padilla. Defense Department personnel took Padilla into custody and detained him at a military brig. Padilla’s counsel filed a habeas corpus petition against Rumsfeld on Padilla’s behalf, challenging Padilla’s detention. The government moved to dismiss the habeas petition, but the district court denied the motion. The court held that the president has the power as commander-in-chief to detain American citizens as enemy combatants and that the government could detain Padilla if it presented evidence that he was an enemy combatant. However, the court said that Padilla could present evidence to rebut the government’s showing. Padilla appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. After concluding that Rumsfeld was the proper respondent in the case and that the district court had personal jurisdiction over Rumsfeld, the Second Circuit examined whether Padilla’s detention was proper.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Pooler, Parker, J.J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Wesley, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.