HAMDAN v. GATES
565 F.Supp.2d 130 (2008)
Salim Ahmed HAMDAN, Plaintiff,
v.
Robert GATES, Defendant.
Civil Action No. 04-1519 (JR).
United States District Court, District of Columbia.
July 18, 2008.
Benjamin S. Sharp, Perkins Coie, LLP, Washington, DC, Joseph M. McMillan, Perkins Coie LLP, Seattle, WA, for Plaintiff.
Brian C. Kipnis, U.S. Attorney's Office, Seattle, WA, Jean Lin, Terry Marcus Henry, U.S. Department of Justice, Jonathan L. Marcus, Washington, DC, John C. O'Quinn, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division, Washington, DC, for Defendant.
MEMORANDUM ORDERJAMES ROBERTSON, District Judge.
Salim Ahmed Hamdan seeks a preliminary injunction that would stop his trial by military commission pending federal court review of the Military Commission's determination that he is an unlawful enemy combatant and of his claims that the trial will violate the Constitution and the Geneva Conventions.
I. BackgroundA. Procedural History
Hamdan is a Yemeni national. He was captured by militia forces in Afghanistan in November 2001 and turned over to the United States military. Since June 2002, he has been held at the Defense Department's detention facility at Guantanamo Bay. One year into his detention at Guantanamo, in July 2003, the President declared him eligible for trial by military commission on unspecified charges. In April 2004, Hamdan filed a petition for mandamus or habeas corpus in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington. On July 13, 2004, two years and eight months into his detention, Hamdan was formally charged with single count of conspiracy "to commit ... offenses triable by military commission." In August 2004, his habeas petition was transferred to the District of Columbia and randomly assigned to me.
Around the same time, in July 2004, in compliance with the Supreme Court's decision in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld,542 U.S. 507, 124 S.Ct. 2633, 159 L.Ed.2d 578 (2004), the Deputy Secretary of Defense established Combatant Status Review Tribunals (CSRTs) to determine whether detainees at Guantanamo are "enemy combatants." Hamdan was classified as a enemy combatant by a CSRT on October 2, 2004, and designated for trial before a military commission.
1. Contrary to the government's insistence that habeas is solely concerned with release, Opp. Memo, at 16-17, this grant of a petition for habeas corpus did not involve Hamdan's release.
2. The Court ignored my conclusion that Hamdan should be put before a tribunal that would determine whether he was a prisoner of war.
3. The MCA purports to bar defendants from asserting defenses or invoking rights based on the Geneva Conventions. See 10 U.S.C. § 948b(g). Should Hamdan be convicted, nothing in the MCA bars him from asserting on appeal, as he does in this motion, that § 948b(g) violates the Supremacy Clause and the separation of powers. See United States v. Klein,80 U.S. 128, 13 Wall. 128, 2p L.Ed. 519 (1872). 4. The government euphemistically calls this section a "review channeling provision."