Civil Liberties

Civil Liberties, Habeas Corpus, and the War on Terror

The purpose behind this paper is to highlight the Habeas Corpus, during the war on terror and how the Bush administration kept the detained prisoners at GITMO and how their civil liberties were not considered since they were situated in a region beyond the jurisdiction of the US constitution. To begin with their will be a short description regarding the civil liberties of the Habeas Corpus.

The Supreme Court should have protected the civil rights of the Habeas Corpus and the whole GITMO facility should have been shut down. Blackstone has called the writ of habeas corpus as the "most celebrated writ in English law" The United states constitution provide the following regarding the habeas corpus. "The privileges of the writ of habeas corpus shall never be suspended unless when it comes to cases of Invasion and Rebellion against the public safety may require it" (Chemerisky, 2001). According to Clark (2012) the habeas corpus can be understood as a way of identifying if a person who has been imprisoned has been jailed legally and for the right reason. When we speak of civil liberties we imply the civil rights of people based on which people are given certain rights and freedom. Presently habeas corpus is only considered for matters related to post conviction for both state and federal prisoners and ensure legal procedures were applied during the judicial proceedings that lead to imprisonment, even though the constitution has not specifically created the right of habeas corpus, it provides the federal courts the right to grant habeas relief to any prisoner, only the congress has this right to suspend the habeas (LII, 2010).

History of Habeas corpus in English law: In the English law the Habeas corpus was first witnessed during the Anglo-Saxon law, it followed the Magna Carta in 1215. The Habeas Corpus was followed in the King and his court, the ever publications on Habeas corpus are recorded by Blackstone...