1
`
`
`
` Cite as: 587 U. S. ____ (2019)
`
` Statement of BREYER, J.
`
`
`
`SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
`MOATH HAMZA AHMED AL-ALWI v. DONALD J.
`TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE
`
`UNITED STATES, ET AL.
`
`ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED
`
`STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF
`
`COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
`
`
`No. 18–740 Decided June 10, 2019
`The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied. JUSTICE
`
`
`KAVANAUGH took no part in the consideration or decision
`of this petition.
`Statement of JUSTICE BREYER respecting the denial of
`
`certiorari.
`
`In the immediate aftermath of the terrorist attacks of
`
`September 11, 2001, Congress passed the Authorization
`
`for Use of Military Force (AUMF), 115 Stat. 224. The
`
`AUMF states that the President may “use all necessary
`
`and appropriate force against those nations, organizations,
`
`or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed,
`
`or aided” those attacks. §2(a), ibid.
`In Hamdi v.
`
`
`
`Rumsfeld, 542 U. S. 507 (2004), a majority of this Court
`understood the AUMF to permit the President to detain
`certain enemy combatants for the duration of the relevant
`conflict. Id., at 517–518 (plurality opinion); id., at 587
`
`(THOMAS, J., dissenting).
`Justice O’Connor’s plurality opinion cautioned that “[i]f
`
`the practical circumstances” of that conflict became “en-
`tirely unlike those of the conflicts that informed the devel-
`opment of the law of war,” the Court’s “understanding” of
`
`what the AUMF authorized “may unravel.” Id., at 521.
`
`
`Indeed, in light of the “unconventional nature” of the “war
`
`on terror,” there was a “substantial prospect” that deten-
`tion for the “duration of the relevant conflict” could
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
` AL-ALWI v. TRUMP
`
` Statement of BREYER, J.
`
`
`
` amount to “perpetual detention.” Id., at 519–521. But as
`
`this was “not the situation we face[d] as of th[at] date,” the
`plurality reserved the question whether the AUMF or the
`Constitution would permit such a result. Id., at 517–518.
`In my judgment, it is past time to confront the difficult
`
`question left open by Hamdi. See Boumediene v. Bush,
`553 U. S. 723, 797–798 (2008) (“Because our Nation’s past
`military conflicts have been of limited duration, it has
`been possible to leave the outer boundaries of war powers
`undefined. If, as some fear, terrorism continues to pose
`
`dangerous threats to us for years to come, the Court might
`not have this luxury”); Hussain v. Obama, 572 U. S. 1079
`
`
`(2014) (statement of BREYER, J., respecting denial of
`certiorari).
`
`Some 17 years have elapsed since petitioner Moath
`
`Hamza Ahmed al-Alwi, a Yemeni national, was first held
`at the United States Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay,
`Cuba.
`In the decision below, the District of Columbia
`Circuit agreed with the Government that it may continue
`
`to detain him so long as “armed hostilities between United
`
`States forces and [the Taliban and al-Qaeda] persist.” 901
`F. 3d 294, 298–299 (2018). The Government represents
`
`that such hostilities are ongoing, but does not state that
`any end is in sight. Brief in Opposition 4–5. As a conse-
`quence, al-Alwi faces the real prospect that he will spend
`the rest of his life in detention based on his status as an
`
`enemy combatant a generation ago, even though today’s
`conflict may differ substantially from the one Congress
`anticipated when it passed the AUMF, as well as those
`
`“conflicts that informed the development of the law of
`war.” Hamdi, 542 U. S., at 521 (plurality opinion).
`
`“The denial of a writ of certiorari imports no expression of
`
`opinion upon the merits of the case.” United States v.
`
`Carver, 260 U. S. 482, 490 (1923). I would, in an appropri-
`ate case, grant certiorari to address whether, in light of the
`
`duration and other aspects of the relevant conflict, Con-
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Cite as: 587 U. S. ____ (2019)
`
` Statement of BREYER, J.
`
`
`
`gress has authorized and the Constitution permits contin-
`ued detention.
`
`3
`
`
`
`