Annual Folwell Lecture talks about terrorism legislation

Oct. 7, 2004
By Keith Claussen
Online Editor

Annual Folwell Lecture talks about terrorism legislation

In the wake of changes following the terrorist attacks three years ago, the legal system and foreign policy matters have been affected both here and abroad.

The second annual Folwell Lecture on Tuesday, Sept. 28, was about the Constitution, and what role it plays in dealing with the war on terrorism and handling detainees during times of conflict.

This year’s speaker was Tung Yin, a law professor at the University of Iowa.  Yin has clerked in the Federal District Court and in the Federal Court of Appeals.  He holds a master’s degree from the University of California, Berkeley.  Yin also has a juris degree, from Berkeley.

His speech centered on the Supreme Court case Rasul v. Bush, dealing with the Guantanamo detainees.

“It is very important for even non-lawyers to know about the Supreme Court,” Yin said.

One of the claims in the case dealt with habeas corpus, a Latin term in the Constitution which means, “to present the body.”

Yin described this as “the most important human right in the Constitution.”  Citizens can use habeas corpus when they are being detained to force the government to either charge them with a crime, or be released from custody.  In times of national emergency or invasion, habeas corpus can be suspended, but only by Congress.

However, in the case of the detainees, people question if foreign nationals being held by the United States in another country have the same right to habeas corpus.

Yaser Esam Hamdi, a U.S. citizen caught three years ago in Afghanistan, was declared an enemy combatant and sent to Guantanamo Bay.  Hamdi was held without access to any legal counsel and was not charged with a crime.  He is now in the process of being released and deported to Saudi Arabia.

Another piece to the case involves the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment.

“Whenever the government does something to you, it has to have a reasonable reason,” Yin explained.

The Supreme Court ultimately decided that the Guantanamo detainees did have some rights to a process to determine if their detention is justified.  There is to be a military tribunal held once a year with a summary of unclassified evidence, and a personal representative for the detainee challenging his detention.

Since Guantanamo is on leased land from Cuba, prisoners do have rights to due process and the government has to eventually declare the reason for the detention, even though the detainees do not specifically have access to the federal courts in the United States.

One of the cases considered in the decision was Isentrogger v. Eisenhower, a World War II case involving a prisoner of war being held overseas during conflict.  The Supreme Court rejected the case.

Dr. Nathan Schlueter, assistant Professor of Political Science and Folwell Chair, had a positive reaction to the lecture.

“I thought it was a great event.  It made the law accessible to laypersons,” Schlueter said.  “There is no room for denouncing anyone on these issues.  They are very complex.”

Frank and Jane Folwell, through the Folwell Chair Endowment, sponsor the annual lecture event.  Mrs. Folwell attended the event along with Linda Newman, former Iowa Supreme Court Justice and speaker of the inaugural Folwell Lecture.

Back to the NEWS-PAGE or "The Buzz" HOMEPAGE