October Term 2003 · Docket 03-6696
Can the government hold a U.S. citizen as an enemy combatant without a hearing?
Yaser Hamdi challenges his indefinite detention. The government claims it has the power to hold him.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Frank Dunham represents Hamdi. He argues the government lacks authority. He says Hamdi has no hearing. He calls the government's stance unreasonable. He demands a factual review.
Paul Clement represents the government. He argues the executive has power. He claims the government can hold Hamdi. He asserts the detention is lawful. He rejects the need for a hearing.
Chief Justice Rehnquist introduces the case. He notes the parties. He invites the first advocate. He manages the oral argument.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 39-43 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 39-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 3-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 3-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 54, lines 41-43 — Transcript, file page 54, lines 41-43
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
Yaser Hamdi is a U.S. citizen. The government holds him as an enemy combatant. He has been detained for over two years. He has not received a hearing. He disputes the facts behind his detention.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 39-43 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 39-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 54, lines 41-43 — Transcript, file page 54, lines 41-43
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on April 28, 2004.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 3-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 3-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 54, lines 41-43 — Transcript, file page 54, lines 41-43
What each side wants
Hamdi wants a hearing to challenge his detention.
The government wants to keep holding Hamdi without a hearing.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 39-43 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 39-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 54, lines 41-43 — Transcript, file page 54, lines 41-43
What each side says
Hamdi argues the government lacks authority to hold him.
The government argues it has the power to detain him.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 39-43 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 39-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 54, lines 41-43 — Transcript, file page 54, lines 41-43
What the justices asked
Does the executive branch have the power to detain a citizen?
Must the government provide a hearing before holding a citizen?
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 39-43 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 39-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 3-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 3-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 54, lines 41-43 — Transcript, file page 54, lines 41-43
Why it matters
This case defines executive power over citizens. It sets limits on detention without trial. It protects due process rights. It balances national security and individual liberty.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 39-43 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 39-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 54, lines 41-43 — Transcript, file page 54, lines 41-43
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 39-43 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 39-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 3-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 3-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 54, lines 41-43 — Transcript, file page 54, lines 41-43
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 39-43 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 39-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 54, lines 41-43 — Transcript, file page 54, lines 41-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 39-43 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 39-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 54, lines 41-43 — Transcript, file page 54, lines 41-43
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.