Tomorrow morning, the en banc Fourth Circuit will hear oral argument in the two Abu Ghraib/contractor preemption cases about which we've blogged previously.

My earlier post prompted the following reply from Cully Stimson, whom I thank for sending such a thoughtful response, and which I think it only fair to post in its entirety: My friend Steve Vladeck takes...

Further to the ongoing exchange (begun on Salon and continued on this blog here and here) between Laura Pitter from Human Rights Watch and Ben on the fairness vel non of the al-Nashiri military commissio...

I don't normally agree on detention policy matters with Seton Hall's Mark Denbeaux--and there's certainly some rhetoric in this piece in Jurist that I would never use and conclusions I do not reach. That...

As Jack and Steve have both noted, yesterday the Fourth Circuit issued its opinion in Lebron v. Rumsfeld, the appeal seeking reversal of a district court's decision denying Jose Padilla declaratory and e...

As Ben pointed out yesterday, the Washington Post report about the possibility that non-Afghan detainees held at Parwan will be repatriated to their home countries is significant news. Apart from its imp...

Laura Pitter of Human Rights Watch responds to my criticisms of her coverage of the Al Nashiri motions hearing: Benjamin Wittes is correct in concluding that I (and Human Rights Watch) share his desire t...

This story in today's Washington Post won't get the attention it would garner if it dealt with Guantanamo, but put it in the category of Very Important if True.

Jack just flagged the Fourth Circuit's unanimous 39-page opinion throwing out Lebron v.

Opinion here.  Commentary later, hopefully.