# Hamdan vs Rumsfeld: SCOTUS decision **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 29, 2006, 3:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hamdan-vs-rumsfeld-scotus-decision/362599 "2006-06-29T03:52:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![minty\_green](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f6c823/32.png) [@minty\_green](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minty_green)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2006, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hamdan-vs-rumsfeld-scotus-decision/362599/101 "2006-07-04T16:18:55Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > I doubt it. I don’t see a case concerning the NSA wiretapping issue making it to the courts. To the contrary, there have already been lawsuits filed against the telcos that cooperated with the NSA’s warrantless wiretaps. I’m not up on the details, but the plaintiffs may also have sued the government directly. Either way, the Bush administration will surely ask the courts to dismiss the case based on the Emperor’s claim to unchecked “wartime” powers. _Hamdan_ makes it much less likely that the cases will be dismissed. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2006, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hamdan-vs-rumsfeld-scotus-decision/362599/102 "2006-07-04T20:32:58Z")
I know there have been some lawsuits filed, but I thought one of resident lawyers here (maybe it was **Hamlet** ) convinced me in another thread that unless an individual can demonstrate actual harm that the courts wouldn’t take the case. How does someone go about finding out if his phone records were handed over or not? ---
**Author:** ![minty\_green](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f6c823/32.png) [@minty\_green](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minty_green)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2006, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hamdan-vs-rumsfeld-scotus-decision/362599/103 "2006-07-04T21:21:47Z")
Through the discovery process, of course. And I seem to recall from some of the commentary on the issue that there is a federal statute providing for penalties for illegal disclosure of the kind of customer records at issue, which ought to take care of the damages/standing question. ---
**Author:** ![Oakminster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/77aa72/32.png) [@Oakminster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oakminster)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2006, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hamdan-vs-rumsfeld-scotus-decision/362599/104 "2006-07-04T21:52:06Z")
> [@minty green](#): > > To the contrary, there have already been lawsuits filed against the telcos that cooperated with the NSA’s warrantless wiretaps. I’m not up on the details, but the plaintiffs may also have sued the government directly. Either way, the Bush administration will surely ask the courts to dismiss the case based on the Emperor’s claim to unchecked “wartime” powers. _Hamdan_ makes it much less likely that the cases will be dismissed. Yup. Don’t have a cite handy, but I think AT&T and BellSouth are named defendants. Pretty sure the Motion to Dismiss has been filed, and it may have been argued, but I haven’t heard about a ruling. Even if granted, an appeal would be likely. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2006, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hamdan-vs-rumsfeld-scotus-decision/362599/105 "2006-07-04T21:59:13Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > Yup. Don’t have a cite handy, but I think AT&T and BellSouth are named defendants. Pretty sure the Motion to Dismiss has been filed, and it may have been argued, but I haven’t heard about a ruling. Even if granted, an appeal would be likely. [Wiki’s article is pretty good.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_challenges_to_NSA_warrantless_searches_in_the_United_States) ---
**Author:** ![Oakminster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/77aa72/32.png) [@Oakminster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oakminster)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2006, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hamdan-vs-rumsfeld-scotus-decision/362599/106 "2006-07-04T22:36:09Z")
Huh…never would have thought about using wikipedia for that kind of info. Cool deal. Thanks, John. ---
**Author:** ![Least\_Original\_User\_Name\_Ever](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e480ec/32.png) [@Least\_Original\_User\_Name\_Ever](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Least_Original_User_Name_Ever)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2006, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hamdan-vs-rumsfeld-scotus-decision/362599/107 "2006-07-04T22:38:46Z")
You seem to believe that congress will start out next week rubber stamping Bushs activities. I hope not and have a wait and see attitude. Congress has been gutless but this gives them another chance. They have the right and duty to oversee FISA and the trials. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2006, 6:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hamdan-vs-rumsfeld-scotus-decision/362599/108 "2006-07-06T06:28:56Z")
> [@Least Original User Name Ever](#): > > You seem to believe that congress will start out next week rubber stamping Bushs activities. Replace “start out” with “resume” and I’ll agree. Expecting this Republican-controlled Congress to actually show any kind of a spine and stand up to the runaway excesses of the Bush Administration is an even longer shot than expecting Ken Lay to rise from the dead and win the World Series single-handedly. ---
**Author:** ![Sevastopol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cdc98d/32.png) [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2006, 6:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hamdan-vs-rumsfeld-scotus-decision/362599/109 "2006-07-08T06:09:38Z")
I’m wondering if anyone wants to put forward a view about what this decision says about strict constructionalism/textualism. In particularly the judgment of the minority, which is where court’s textualists reside. I’m at a loss to understand why Scalia, Thomas and Alito didn’t seize on this closely watched supreme court case as an exercise to publicise the merits of a textualist construction of the relevant legal instruments. In particular the GC. Curiously, the justices in this instance appear to have retreated from textualism to a variety of policy positions concerning the war on terror. Whatever this tells us about textualism and its proponents is ever a mystery to me. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hamdan-vs-rumsfeld-scotus-decision/362599.md?page=5)