Professor explains habeas corpus issues

In a new book, “Habeas for the Twenty-First Century,” law professor Joseph Hoffmann and co-author Nancy King discuss how habeas corpus has been misused in the
United States.

Habeas corpus is a legal procedure through which a prisoner can petition a judge to be released from unlawful imprisonment.

“Other than maybe executing someone, there’s nothing government can do to you that’s worse than just locking you up and throwing away the key,” Hoffman said. “Habeas corpus is the protection against that.”

Hoffman said when a federal dilemma is occurring, problems with habeas corpus emerge.

“During times of political or social crisis, the government goes into panic mode and starts locking up whoever they think is dangerous,” he said.

Victims of this include Chinese immigrants in the 1880s, accused Communists during the Red Scare throughout the early 20th century, Japanese Americans during World War II and Cubans involved in the Mariel boatlift in 1980.

The prison at Guantanamo Bay exemplifies the issue of imprisoned people who are denied habeas corpus. After Sept. 11, 2001, fear of terrorism led to the imprisonment of people thought to be potential threats to the U.S., and many were taken to Guantanamo.

“Guantanamo is an interesting place because it’s not on American soil,” Hoffman said. “It’s technically outside the legal jurisdiction of any of the U.S. courts.”

As part of the law that authorized the internments at Guantanamo, Congress barred prisoners from having access to the U.S. civilian courts. They could not issue a writ of habeas corpus.

The framers of the Constitution referred to habeas corpus as “The Great Writ.” The Constitution states that habeas corpus cannot be suspended unless the president does so during times of war or civil insurrection.

Based on these facts, the Supreme Court found the Guantanamo practices unconstitutional in the case Boumediene v. Bush.

 Boumediene was a Bosnian man who was captured based on having connections to a member of Al-Qaeda.

“He spent more than seven years locked up in Guantanamo for no reason other than that we were in panic mode,” Hoffman said. “The only thing that saved him was habeas corpus.”

However, problems with habeas corpus remain.

“If you’re a state prisoner and you’ve been sentenced to some lengthy prison term, what else are you going to do?” he said. “You might as well file a habeas corpus petition. If nothing else, it will be interesting.”

Hoffman said 17,000 state prisoners file for habeas corpus every year, of which merely 70 are granted any kind of relief, such as another trial.

This creates a larger issue than wasting time and money, Hoffman said.

“Abusing habeas corpus is dangerous because it will make the writ itself less respected,” he said.

Undermining its value could lead to restrictions that would make it harder for judges to use it when needed.

The book proposes a solution. Prisoners wishing to petition for habeas corpus must either have a death sentence or prove their innocence with newfound evidence.

“Our specific proposal in the book is that we need a new amendment to that statute of Congress,” Hoffman said.