Andreas Feuerstein

In the war on terrorism, does the United States Judiciary fulfill its critical function to guarantee compliance by the Executive with the political norms and ideals of human rights codified both in the United States Constitution and International Law? This study examines the means by which policies such as the Bush Administration applies in the war on terrorism can be achieved in the United States system of government. It focuses on the legal concepts affected by the Bush Administration’s treatment of alleged enemy combatants after September 11, 2001 by analyzing three lawsuits filed with United States Courts. The three cases—Rumsfeld v. Padilla, Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, and Rasul v. Bush—so far have been the only cases reviewed by the highest court of the nation, the United States Supreme Court.

Andreas Feuerstein studied political science, history, and sociology at the University of Innsbruck and the University of Vienna.

„Am Beispiel von drei Rechtsfällen (Rumsfeld gegen Padilla, Hamdi gegen Rumsfeld, Rasul gegen Bush) untersucht Feuerstein die Praxis des Obersten Gerichtshofs. Er versteht die Judikative als politischen Akteur und bettet seine Untersuchung in den Gesamtkontext des politischen Systems ein. Außerdem berücksichtigt er vergleichbare Fälle des nationalen Notstands in der Geschichte der USA.“ (Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft, 04/2006)