You are not currently logged in.
Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
"HAMDAN V. RUMSFELD": THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION AND 'THE RULE OF LAW'
Australasian Journal of American Studies
Vol. 25, No. 2 (December 2006), pp. 40-52
Published by: Australia New Zealand American Studies Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41054023
Page Count: 13
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
In June 2006 the US Supreme Court announced its decision in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, the Court's most notable case in its 2005-2006 Session. Widely hailed as a check on presidential power with regard to the treatment of Guantanamo Bay detainees, Hamdan was in fact a restrained, primarily procedural decision that represented no real threat to presidential authority. George W. Bush went to work immediately to transform what many took to be a judicial roadblock into apolitical advantage aimed at the further expansion of executive power.
Australasian Journal of American Studies © 2006 Australia New Zealand American Studies Association