JURIST Supported by the University of Pittsburgh
Serious law. Primary sources. Global perspective.

Monday, January 25, 2010

Supreme Court declines to hear Noriega extradition appeal
Andrew Morgan at 10:36 AM ET

[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website; JURIST news archive] on Monday declined to hear [order list, PDF] an appeal brought by former Panamanian military leader Manuel Noriega [BBC backgrounder, JURIST news archive] challenging a lower court ruling denying his habeas corpus petition and authorizing his extradition to France on money laundering charges. Noriega, who has been declared a prisoner of war, sought to enforce a provision of the Geneva Convention [ICRC backgrounder] that requires repatriation at the end of confinement. In an April decision [JURIST report], the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit found that his claim was precluded by § 5 of the Military Commission Act of 2006 [text, PDF], which the Government argued "codifie[d] the principle that the Geneva Conventions [a]re not judicially enforceable by private parties." Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia dissented from the denial of certiorari, arguing that the Court should use the opportunity to resolve confusion over its decision in Boumediene v. Bush [opinion, PDF; JURIST report] granting federal courts the power to review habeas petitions brought by "enemy combatants."

It is incumbent upon us to provide what guidance we can on these issues now. Whatever conclusion we reach, our opinion will help the political branches and the courts discharge their responsibilities over detainee cases, and will spare detainees and the Government years of unnecessary litigation.

They said that Noriega's case presented a unique opportunity to address the constitutional question regarding the Suspension Clause [Justia backgrounder] without the complications of dealing with classified evidence or "issues relating to extraterritorial detention."

The Court also granted certiorari in the consolidated cases of Abbott v. United States and Gould v. United States [docket; cert. petition, PDF] to consider whether the minimum sentencing guidelines for armed offenses in 18 USC § 924(c) [text] includes the drug offense giving rise to the sentence, or another weapons offense for the same transaction.

Link |  | print | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | Facebook page

For more legal news check the Paper Chase Archive...


 US House approves lawsuit against Obama
2:35 PM ET, July 31

 Airline advocacy groups challenge increased fees by TSA
12:55 PM ET, July 31

 France president condemns Israel for attack on UN refugee camp in Palestine
12:03 PM ET, July 31

 click for more...

Get JURIST legal news delivered daily to your e-mail!


Unprecedented Notice of Warrantless Wiretapping in a Closed Case
Ramzi Kassem
CUNY School of Law


Paper Chase is JURIST's real-time legal news service, powered by a team of 30 law student reporters and editors led by law professor Bernard Hibbitts at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. As an educational service, Paper Chase is dedicated to presenting important legal news and materials rapidly, objectively and intelligibly in an accessible, ad-free format.


Paper Chase welcomes comments, tips and URLs from readers. E-mail us at JURIST@jurist.org