Khairulla Khairkhwa v. Barack Obama
403 U.S. App. D.C. 227
D.C. Cir.2012Background
- Khairkhwa, a Guantanamo detainee, sought habeas relief from a D.C. District Court ruling denying detention.
- He was a senior Taliban official, including roles as governor of Herat and acting interior minister, with leadership toward Taliban forces.
- Evidence showed Khairkhwa participated in high-level Taliban military planning, and met with Iranian officials in 2000 and 2001 to discuss support and defense.
- He traveled with weapons to Kandahar in November 2001 and turned over weapons to a local official, indicating ongoing involvement with Taliban forces.
- The district court found he remained part of Taliban forces at the time of his capture, and this supported detention under the AUMF and subsequent NDAA authority.
- The D.C. Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial, applying established precedent that detention may be justified if the detainee is part of or substantially supported Taliban/al-Qaeda forces, without requiring direct combat participation or future danger findings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Khairkhwa was part of Taliban forces for detention | Khairkhwa contends he was not part of Taliban forces | District court found he was part of Taliban forces | Affirmed part-of-forces detention finding. |
| Whether active combat or future danger is required for detention | Awkwardly implies direct combat or future danger was required | Detention valid without proving combat or future danger | No combat/future-danger requirement; part-of-forces sufficient. |
| Whether Awad controls overruleable precedent applies | Awad should control regardless of panels | One panel cannot overrule another; precedent remains | Awad governs; no contrary ruling by this panel. |
Key Cases Cited
- Al-Bihani v. Obama, 590 F.3d 866 (D.C. Cir. 2010) (detention valid if part of forces, not required to fight)
- Awad v. Obama, 608 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2010) (detention authority extends to part of forces; no combat proof required)
- Al-Adahi v. Obama, 613 F.3d 1102 (D.C. Cir. 2010) (supports broader detention standard for Taliban-associated individuals)
- Al Odah v. United States, 611 F.3d 8 (D.C. Cir. 2010) (reiterates detention authority for those tied to hostile forces)
- Barhoumi v. Obama, 609 F.3d 416 (D.C. Cir. 2010) (discussion of detention standards and related factors)
- Awad v. Obama, 608 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2010) (controlling framing of whether future danger is required)
- Uthman v. Obama, 637 F.3d 400 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (supports non-requirement of direct combat)