reviewing awards under § 505 for an abuse of discretion, and noting that district courts are given “wide latitude” to make this decision
How later courts described this case
- reviewing awards under § 505 for an abuse of discretion, and noting that district courts are given “wide latitude” to make this decision
- “[Boumediene’s] holding, however, was ‘explicitly confined only to the extraterritorial reach of the Suspension Clause,’. . . [a]nd it is settled that certain other constitutional provisions do not protect aliens outside the sovereign United States. See, e.g., Kiyemba v. Obama, 555 F.3d 1022 , 1026 & n.9 (D.C. Cir. 6 2009) (Due Process Clause of Fifth Amendment does not apply to aliens at Guantanamo).” (internal citation omitted) (quoting Rasul, 563 F.3d at 529 )
- “That holding, however, was ‘explicitly confined [] ‘only’ to the extraterritorial reach of the Suspension Clause,’ and expressly ‘disclaimed any intention to disturb existing law governing the extraterritorial reach of any constitutional provisions, other than the Suspension Clause.’” (quoting Rasul v. Myers, 563 F.3d 527, 529 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (quoting Boumediene, 553 U.S. at 795 , 128 S. Ct. at 2275-76 ))
- discussing Rome Statute in the context of the crime of conspiracy
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
KAREN LeCRAFT HENDERSON, Circuit Judge,
concurring:
I join the Court’s judgment affirming Bahlul’s conspiracy conviction. I do so for the reasons stated in my dissent in Al Bahlul v. United States, 792 F.3d 1, 27-72 (D.C. Cir. 2015) (since vacated). I incorporate by reference thereto that previously published opinion as my concurrence here.