Abdul Al Qader Hussain v. Barack Obama
405 U.S. App. D.C. 314
| D.C. Cir. | 2013Background
- Hussain, a Yemeni citizen, was detained at Guantanamo after being captured in March 2002 in Faisalabad, Pakistan.
- Between 1999 and 2001 he lived and traveled across Pakistan and Afghanistan, including extended stays in Jama’at al-Tablighi mosques and near front-line Taliban areas.
- In Afghanistan he resided for about ten months near the front lines with Taliban guards who provided and taught him to use an AK-47.
- The district court denied habeas relief after finding Hussain part of al Qaeda or the Taliban at capture; the government argued detention was permissible under the AUMF.
- The governing standard applied is that detention is justified if the detainee was part of al Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces at capture, by a preponderance of the evidence.
- The concurrence critiques the majority’s reliance on inference and reaffirms concerns about the evidentiary standards in Guantanamo habeas cases.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether AUMF authorizes detention for ‘part of’ al Qaeda/associated forces. | Hussain argues no necessity to prove membership, only lack of proof. | Government contends detention valid if detainee is part of al Qaeda, Taliban, or associated forces. | Yes; detention justified under AUMF if part of those groups. |
| Is preponderance of the evidence the required standard to prove detention eligibility? | Hussain emphasizes the standard may not require preponderance. | Government relies on established preponderance framework in circuit precedent. | Preponderance standard applies and is satisfied by the record. |
| Does mere contact with JT mosques establish affiliation with al Qaeda? | RepeatedJT contact alone is insufficient. | Extended stays at JT mosques are probative of affiliation. | Undertook a fact-specific analysis; extended JT stays support affiliation. |
| Must government prove Hussain personally engaged in hostilities? | No requirement to show personal participation in hostilities. | Detention valid if part of the enemy force, regardless of combat action. | Not required to prove personal combat; being part of enemy forces suffices. |
| Should the court distinguish between al Qaeda vs. Taliban affiliation for detention? | Separating affiliations is necessary for a precise finding. | Affiliation with either enemy group justifies detention; overlap exists. | No error in treating both as ‘part of’ enemy forces. |
| Concurrence concerns about jurisprudence and standards in detainee cases |
Key Cases Cited
- Khairkhwa v. Obama, 703 F.3d 547 (D.C.Cir.2012) (detention under AUMF; part of al Qaeda/associated forces standard)
- Uthman v. Obama, 637 F.3d 400 (D.C.Cir.2011) (mixed question of law and fact; governing standard)
- Salahi v. Obama, 625 F.3d 745 (D.C.Cir.2010) (evidence aggregation; not isolating pieces)
- Bensayah v. Obama, 610 F.3d 718 (D.C.Cir.2010) (no exhaustive list; total record considered)
- Awad v. Obama, 608 F.3d 1 (D.C.Cir.2010) (precludes requirement of hostilities participation)
- Al-Bihani v. Obama, 590 F.3d 866 (D.C.Cir.2010) (example of affiliation via allied groups; noncombatant roles)
- Al-Adahi v. Obama, 613 F.3d 1102 (D.C.Cir.2010) (assumed preponderance standard for analysis; burden on government)
- Almerfedi v. Obama, 654 F.3d 1 (D.C.Cir.2011) (JT affiliation is probative when extended over time)
- Alsabri v. Obama, 684 F.3d 1298 (D.C.Cir.2012) (inference from weapon possession near front lines supports loyalty)
- Suleiman v. Obama, 670 F.3d 1311 (D.C.Cir.2012) (context of Taliban/al Qaeda associations; evidence considered)
- Al-Madhwani v. Obama, 642 F.3d 1071 (D.C.Cir.2011) (affiliation evidence and proximity to enemy)
- Al Alwi v. Obama, 653 F.3d 11 (D.C.Cir.2011) (clarifies ‘part of’ standard across groups)