Rasul v. Bush

Summary

This dissent argues the Court's holding that the habeas statute extends to aliens detained overseas contradicts precedent, particularly Johnson v. Eisentrager, and ignores statutory text requiring territorial jurisdiction. Justice Scalia concludes the decision improperly overturns settled law and complicates military affairs. Justice Kennedy concurred in the judgment, agreeing on jurisdiction but grounding his reasoning in the specific status of Guantanamo Bay and indefinite detention.