General Definitions and Short Answer Questions - Essay Example

Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, refers to a case brought before the US Supreme Court in 2006 returning a verdict that the Bush’s military commissions were unconstitutionally set up given that its structures and procedures contravened the Uniform Code of Military Justice [UCMJ] as well as the internally agreed Geneva convention Ex Parte Quirin refers to a case brought before the Supreme Court in 1942 that returned a verdict upholding the constitutionality of the military tribunal trying eight Nazi agents as unlawful combatants.

Military Commission Act of 2006 is an Act of congress signed into law by the then president of the United States, George W. Bush, authorizing and delineating trial procedures of suspected terrorists by the military commission. Ex parte Milligan was a case before the United States Supreme Court in 1866 nullifying the trial of Lambdin Milligan, an American citizen, by a military tribunal as unconstitutional as long as civil courts were operational. Boumediene v. Bush refers to a case in which the United States’ Supreme Court declared the barring of “enemy combatants” held in the United States from accessing the law challenging their detention by the Military Commission Act (2006) as unconstitutional.

FISC [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court] is a United States’ federal court established under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) charged with overseeing warrant requests for surveillance of foreign nationals suspected of spying on the United States. The decision of trying the 9/11 terrorist suspects in civilian courts is one that has been met with criticism and positivity in equal measure. Noteworthy, the question as to whether the civilian courts would do more justice to the victims of the 9/11 attack than the military tribunal has never been more obscure.

To be sure, nothing would be more satisfying to the victims than