Asha Rangappa

But in terms of evading actual court authority, what the Bush administration did is that they looked at some World War II precedents that said that enemy combatants who were imprisoned in a location over which the U.S. had no control, that those people did not have the right to petition for habeas corpus. And the Bush administration thought, hey, that's great.

But in terms of evading actual court authority, what the Bush administration did is that they looked at some World War II precedents that said that enemy combatants who were imprisoned in a location over which the U.S. had no control, that those people did not have the right to petition for habeas corpus. And the Bush administration thought, hey, that's great.

We can put people in Guantanamo Bay because that's, you know, under the sovereign control of Cuba. And we can basically have this convenient location where we can house all these people. But it will be out of reach of the courts. And this led to a pretty robust jurisprudence after 9-11 where the courts didn't really like getting cut out of the equation necessarily.

We can put people in Guantanamo Bay because that's, you know, under the sovereign control of Cuba. And we can basically have this convenient location where we can house all these people. But it will be out of reach of the courts. And this led to a pretty robust jurisprudence after 9-11 where the courts didn't really like getting cut out of the equation necessarily.

And so they began to have these decisions where they said, no, we actually do have the right to look at what you're doing there.

And so they began to have these decisions where they said, no, we actually do have the right to look at what you're doing there.

And all of this results, by the way, Ezra, in this irony that Guantanamo detainees who were captured abroad, who never stepped foot on American soil, had the ability to petition for a writ of habeas corpus, due process rights, the ability to contest their enemy combatant status, and were protected by the the Geneva Conventions.

And all of this results, by the way, Ezra, in this irony that Guantanamo detainees who were captured abroad, who never stepped foot on American soil, had the ability to petition for a writ of habeas corpus, due process rights, the ability to contest their enemy combatant status, and were protected by the the Geneva Conventions.

So what you're seeing now is that people who have literally been here for a decade aren't being afforded those same privileges and rights.

So what you're seeing now is that people who have literally been here for a decade aren't being afforded those same privileges and rights.

It's horrifying. And I think the administration, what I think is horrifying here is that they've been very legally savvy, right? Right. Like they understand whatever lawyers have studied this, understand the trajectory of what happened with the Bush administration. And they know, OK, for this to be a constitutional black hole, it has to be completely in another country.

It's horrifying. And I think the administration, what I think is horrifying here is that they've been very legally savvy, right? Right. Like they understand whatever lawyers have studied this, understand the trajectory of what happened with the Bush administration. And they know, OK, for this to be a constitutional black hole, it has to be completely in another country.

And not just to extract information, but they just need to be sent there and we throw away the key.

And not just to extract information, but they just need to be sent there and we throw away the key.

Right. I was going to say, I think the only change I would make to what you said is it's not if we can win on this, then we can do everything else. It's if we can defy this, then we're home free.

Right. I was going to say, I think the only change I would make to what you said is it's not if we can win on this, then we can do everything else. It's if we can defy this, then we're home free.

In power. And this is the difference, I think, between what the Trump administration is doing and what the Bush administration is doing. The Bush administration didn't want the Supreme Court to end up ruling on something that wasn't going to go its way. So...

In power. And this is the difference, I think, between what the Trump administration is doing and what the Bush administration is doing. The Bush administration didn't want the Supreme Court to end up ruling on something that wasn't going to go its way. So...

When they thought that maybe they did not have the best legal case, they would move the detainee out or they would put them into criminal proceedings to avoid having the question actually answered. Because it's sort of, then they're still sort of acting in some gray zone. The Trump administration is willing to take, as you mentioned, these bad cases.

When they thought that maybe they did not have the best legal case, they would move the detainee out or they would put them into criminal proceedings to avoid having the question actually answered. Because it's sort of, then they're still sort of acting in some gray zone. The Trump administration is willing to take, as you mentioned, these bad cases.