Waging War, Deciding Guilt: Trying the Constitutionality of the Military Tribunals

53 Pages Posted: 28 Feb 2002

See all articles by Neal Kumar Katyal

Neal Kumar Katyal

Georgetown University Law Center

Laurence H. Tribe

Harvard Law School


In this paper, we argue that President Bush's recent Military Order, which directs his Defense Department to detain any of an ill-defined class of individuals, potentially indefinitely, and to try them in military tribunals, jeopardizes the separation of powers today and charts a dangerous course for the future. Our Constitution's structure mandates that fundamental choices, in times of peace as well as war, are to be made not by one person or one branch, but by the three branches of government working together. Approval by Congress is a necessary, but by no means sufficient, precondition before the tribunals can be entertained as constitutional. We also explain why the present circumstances differ decisively from those at issue in the Supreme Court's body of decisions regarding military tribunals during the Civil War and World War II. We further explain why the specter of civilian habeas review will necessitate legislative involvement, and detail the significant equal protection problem with the Military Order.

Suggested Citation

Katyal, Neal K. and Tribe, Laurence H., Waging War, Deciding Guilt: Trying the Constitutionality of the Military Tribunals. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=299428 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.299428

Neal K. Katyal (Contact Author)

Georgetown University Law Center ( email )

600 New Jersey Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001
United States
202-662-9807 (Phone)
202-662-9410 (Fax)

Laurence H. Tribe

Harvard Law School ( email )

1575 Massachusetts
Hauser 418
Cambridge, MA 02138
United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
PlumX Metrics