# Reply Brief — Munaf v. Geren > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385016_0361%3A04 ## Record - **Collection:** Supreme Court brief - **Document type:** Reply Brief - **Published:** January 1, 2008 - **Citation:** 553 U.S. 674 ## Text PE ORS TO TT ERE PRE NY Cee EES Ee Pee Oe Ne SERS OEP ps Ee ee URN) Se oy CSS ee No. 06-1666 q In The Supreme Court of the United States 3 ° 4 MOHAMMAD MUNAF, ET AL., 4 Petitioners, :: v. 3 PETE GEREN, ET AL., Respondents. On Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari : To The United States Court Of 3 For The District Of Columbia Circuit ° : REPLY BRIEF 4 Pp a + JONATHAN HAFETZ JOSEPH MARGULIES - Aziz Z. Huq Counsel of Record 5 BRENNAN CENTER FOR MACARTHUR JUSTICE CENTER : JUSTICE NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY é NEw YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF Law 4 SCHOOL OF LAW 357 East Chicago Avenue ; 161 Avenue of the Americas Chicago, IL 60611 4 12th Floor Telephone: (312) 503-0890 4 New York, NY 10013 d Eric M. FREEDMAN 4 Susan L. BURKE New York, NY 10025 KATHERINE HAWKINS Telephone: (212) 665-2713 4 BURKE O’NEIL, LLC 4112 Station Street pos aaa q Philadelphia, PA 19127 Roames. KAPLAN. MILLER Telephone: (215) 487-6590 & Ciresi ‘ ; 2800 LaSalle Plaza : Minneapolis, MN 55402 4 Telephone: (612) 349-8500 ; Counsel for Petitioners ’ 3 COOCKLE LAW BRIEF PRINTING Cor 50) on eet i OR CALL COLLECT 42) 342-2801 3 3 : Yew oe ON Pe Oe (eee Sn ny Ba, Lae tt ee AE TY Les Pen eee CE eee eS be Ree, See a ee ee ee, eS en, one an ee er ere, REPLY BRIEF Retreating from its position below, the govern- ment now agrees with Mr. Munaf that the power of a U.S. court to inquire into the lawfulness of his deten- tion cannot depend on the happenstance of a foreign conviction. Cf. Pet. for Cert. at 14-16, Geren v. Omar (No. 07-394). The parties therefore agree that the process which took place before the Iraqi courts, whatever relevance it may have to the merits, “has nothing to do with the existence of jurisdiction.” Jd. at 13-14. The parties also agree that the threshold juris- dictional question is the same in Munaf and Omar.’ The government, however, believes Omar presents a “superior vehicle” for resolution of this shared issue, and therefore urges the Court to grant Omar and hold Munaf. Alternatively, it asks the Court to grant ' The government is incorrect to state that it argued the merits questions that Judge Randolph reached in his separate opinion. See Br. for Resp'ts at 17. Judge Randolph concluded the “the district court had jurisdiction over Munaf's habeas corpus petition.” Munaf v. Geren, 482 F.3d 582, 585 (D.C. Cir. 2007) (Randolph, J., concurring). Hence, he rejected the “jurisdictional and justiciability concerns” that the government raised in its brief. Br. for Resp'ts at 17; see also Br. for Appellees at 11-16, Munaf v. Geren, 482 F.3d 582, 585 (D.C. Cir. 2007) (No. 06-1455) (framing issue solely in terms of jurisdiction and justiciability, and not the merits question of whether the government has the power to detain or transfer Mr. Munaf). Thus, as in Omar, the government has improperly attempted to import a merits question into a jurisdic- tional appeal — despite the fact that the parties did not brief, and the lower court did not address, the merits. wes : pil Sie at) Foe ks . a See ae se " x eT Te AS ee ee ee eg A, ~ OP I ate) a a ee Se ERY et 2 and consolidate both cases. Jd. at 26; see also Br. for Resp’ts at 19-20. Here, the parties part company. % As demonstrated at length in Mr. Omar’s re- sponse to the government’s petition for certiorari, the _-«-government’s reading of Hirota v. MacArthur is _ plainly incorrect: the government simply lacks the __ power to seize and hold its citizens without judicial oversight, and nothing in Hirota is to the contrary. _ See generally Br. for the Resp’ts, Geren v. Omar (dkt _ no. 07-394). For that reason, the government’s peti- _ tion in Omar should be denied. The proper resolution of Munaf follows logically from that result: The Court should grant the petition in Munaf, vacate the deci- sion below in light of the position now asserted by the government, and remand for proceedings on the merits of Mr. Munaf’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus. If, however, the Court grants the petition in Omar, then Mr. Munaf agrees with the government that his petition should be held pending the outcome in that case.” a « & Bi ba re a “a F * The government identifies Mr. Munaf as a dual-citizen, as though it were somehow significant that he was not born in this country. See, e.g., Br. for Resp’ts at 15. “Under our Constitution, a naturalized citizen stands on an equal footing with the native citizen in all respects, save that of eligibility to the Presidency,” Luria v. United States, 231 U.S. 9, 13 (1913), and the Supreme Court has long understood the importance to the country of a rigorous insistence on this principle. See, e.g., Baumgartner v. United States, 322 U.S. 665 (1944). i es is "oe te ee See 3 Respectfully submitted, JOSEPH MARGULIES* 4 MACARTHUR JUSTICE CENTER a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW q 357 East Chicago Avenue Chicago, IL 60611 Telephone: (312) 503-0890 Facsimile: (312) 503-1272 Aziz Z. Huq JONATHAN HAFETZ BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE NEw YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW 161 Avenue of the Americas, 12th Floor New York, NY 10013 Telephone: (212) 998-6730 _ Facsimile: (212) 995-4550 SUSAN L. BURKE KATHERINE HAWKINS _ BuRKE O’NEIL LLC 4112 Station Street _ Philadelphia, PA 19127 Telephone: (215) 487-6590 Facsimile: (215) 482-0874 Eric M. FREEDMAN 250 West 94th Street New York, NY 10025 Telephone: (212) 665-2713 Facsimile: (212) 665-2714 aa = a. 3 “ 2 os Fs pe at t AS - ip ee : PIN eT —_ a OO ee 14 a 7 ~~ Ft Bae at i Pea ‘ . ae \ oT Le et Ae Hy) “* --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385016_0361%3A04. Public record. Not legal advice.