On Oct. 7, a district court issued an order directing the government to release 17 Chinese Muslims held at Guantanamo. The decision sparked apoplexy inside the government, even though the decision exemplified the sole purpose of habeas corpus -- ending illegal detention. That this logical holding is even controversial hints at a troubling gulf between present understandings of the courts' constitutional functions and the courts' actual role under the Constitution, writes NYU Law professor Aziz Huq.
Commentary: Free the Uighurs!
October 15, 2008