List of United States Supreme Court military case law

Last updated

This is a list of Supreme Court of the United States cases in the areas of military justice, national security, and other aspects of war.

Contents

This list is a list solely of United States Supreme Court decisions about applying law related to war. Not all Supreme Court decisions are ultimately influential and, as in other fields, not all important decisions are made at the Supreme Court level. Many federal courts issue rulings that are significant or come to be influential, but those are outside the scope of this list.

General

19th century

20th century

21st century

Freedom of Information Act

Liability

Reservists

Selective Service and draft

State secrets privilege

Veterans

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States Secretary of Defense</span> Head of the US Department of Defense

The United States secretary of defense (SecDef) is the head of the United States Department of Defense, the executive department of the U.S. Armed Forces, and is a high-ranking member of the federal cabinet. The secretary of defense's position of command and authority over the military is second only to that of the president of the United States, who is the commander-in-chief. This position corresponds to what is generally known as a defense minister in many other countries. The secretary of defense is appointed by the president with the advice and consent of the Senate, and is by custom a member of the Cabinet and by law a member of the National Security Council.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Melvin Laird</span> American politician and writer (1922–2016)

Melvin Robert Laird Jr. was an American politician, writer and statesman. He was a U.S. congressman from Wisconsin from 1953 to 1969 before serving as Secretary of Defense from 1969 to 1973 under President Richard Nixon. Laird was instrumental in forming the administration's policy of withdrawing U.S. soldiers from the Vietnam War; he coined the expression "Vietnamization," referring to the process of transferring more responsibility for combat to the South Vietnamese forces. First elected in 1952, Laird was the last living Representative elected to the 83rd Congress at the time of his death.

<i>Ex parte Merryman</i> United States legal case

Ex parte Merryman, 17 F. Cas. 144 (No. 9487), was a controversial U.S. federal court case that arose out of the American Civil War. It was a test of the authority of the President to suspend "the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus" under the Constitution's Suspension Clause, when Congress was in recess and therefore unavailable to do so itself. More generally, the case raised questions about the ability of the executive branch to decline to enforce judicial decisions when the executive believes them to be erroneous and harmful to its own legal powers.

Ex parte Garland, 71 U.S. 333 (1866), was an important United States Supreme Court case involving the disbarment of former Confederate officials.

Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426 (2004), was a United States Supreme Court case, in which José Padilla, an American citizen, sought habeas corpus relief against Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, as a result of his detention by the military as an "unlawful combatant."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Guantanamo military commission</span> U.S. military tribunals

The Guantanamo military commissions were established by President George W. Bush through a military order on November 13, 2001, to try certain non-citizen terrorism suspects at the Guantanamo Bay prison. To date, there have been a total of eight convictions in the military commissions, six through plea agreements. Several of the eight convictions have been overturned in whole or in part on appeal by U.S. federal courts.

Johnson v. Eisentrager, 339 U.S. 763 (1950), was a major decision of the US Supreme Court, where it decided that US courts had no jurisdiction over German war criminals held in a US-administered prison in Germany. The prisoners had at no time been on American sovereign territory.

The following is a complete list of cases decided by the United States Supreme Court organized by volume of the United States Reports in which they appear. This is a list of volumes of U.S. Reports, and the links point to the contents of each individual volume. Each volume was edited by one of the Reporters of Decisions of the Supreme Court. As of the beginning of the October 2019 Term, there were 574 bound volumes of the U.S. Reports. There were another 14 volumes worth of opinions available as "slip opinions", which are preliminary versions of the opinion published on the Supreme Court's website.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Non-Detention Act</span> US federal law

The Non-Detention Act of 1971 is a United States statute enacted to repeal portions of the McCarran Internal Security Act of 1950, specifically Title II, the "Emergency Detention Act". The law repealed the Emergency Detention Act of 1950 provisioning the United States Attorney General with powers for detention of anyone in the US deemed to be a threat to the national security of the United States. The 64 Stat. 1019 statute was codified within Title 50 War and National Defense as 50 U.S.C. ch. 23, subch. II §§ 811-826.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States constitutional criminal procedure</span>

The United States Constitution contains several provisions regarding the law of criminal procedure.

United States v. More, 7 U.S. 159 (1805), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that it had no jurisdiction to hear appeals from criminal cases in the circuit courts by writs of error. Relying on the Exceptions Clause, More held that Congress's enumerated grants of appellate jurisdiction to the Court operated as an exercise of Congress's power to eliminate all other forms of appellate jurisdiction.

Shaughnessy v. United States ex rel Mezei, 345 U.S. 206 (1953), was a United States Supreme Court case that established the federal government's power to detain migrants at the border pending deportation. The Supreme Court, in a five to four decision, held that the Attorney General's continued exclusion of the unauthorized immigrant without a hearing does not amount to an unlawful detention, and the court may not temporarily admit such individuals into the United States pending arrangements for their departure abroad. Some consider the decision in Shaughnessy v. United States ex rel Mezei as the Court's strongest statement of the plenary power doctrine as the power to permanently exclude noncitizens is based in U.S. sovereignty and largely immune from judicial control.