Maqaleh v. Gates Amicus Brief

[xoxoxoBruce]

Mike Yon has posted a pdf of the amicus curiae brief filed with the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, on behalf of the Special Operations community.

BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE SPECIAL FORCES ASSOCIATION, U.S. ARMY RANGER ASSOCIATION, SEN. LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, ABRAHAM GERMAN, WADE ISHIMOTO, ANDREW NICHOLS PRATT, DENNIS WALTERS, GEORGE R. WORTHINGTON, MICHAEL YON AND SEN. RYAN ZINKE IN SUPPORT OF APPELLANTS.


TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTEREST OF AMICI

BACKGROUND

ARGUMENT
I. The District Court Erred In Its Consideration Of The “Site Of Apprehension” Factor
... A. The “Battlefield” Extends Beyond Afghanistan
... B. The District Court’s Decision Creates Legal Sanctuaries For Enemy forces
... C. It Is Not The Role Of The Judiciary To Define The “Battlefield.”
II. The District Court Underestimated The “Practical Difficulties” Of Making Habeas Corpus Proceedings Available To Bagram Detainees
... A. Preponderance Of The Evidence Is A High Standard In The Context Of Ongoing Combat Operations
... B. Special Operations Missions Are Not Suited To The Collection Of This Kind Of Evidence
..... 1. SOF Do Not Have The Time To Safely Gather Evidence
..... 2. Gathering Evidence To Satisfy Habeas Courts Will Impair SOF Operations
..... 3. It Is All-But-Impossible To Collect Useful Or Admissible Evidence In The Midst Of Combat
..... 4. The District Court’s Decision Will Have A Chilling Effect On Intelligence Gathering
... C. The District Court’s Decision Will Make It All But Impossible To Hold Enemy Combatants Seized By Allied Forces
III. CONCLUSION

Basically they are saying to the court, what are you fucking nuts? You want Special Forces in combat to put up crime scene tape, chalk outline the bodies, tag a photograph all shell casings, like a TV show?