| JURIST Search: "Uighurs" | |
| Searching the JURIST archive... |  |
|
 |
|
Federal judge ordered Uighurs released from Guantanamo [this day at law]
October 7, 2010 by Dwyer Arce
On October 7, 2008, a judge for the US District Court for the District of Columbia ordered the release 17 Uighur detainees from the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, ruling that the Constitution forbids their indefinite detention without cause. Judge Ricardo Urbina gave the government until the.... [more]
DC Circuit refuses evidentiary hearing for Uighur detainees
May 28, 2010 by Sarah Miley
The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on Friday refused to order a new evidentiary hearing in the case of five Chinese Muslim Uighurs detained at Guantanamo Bay. Instead, in a per curiam decision, the court reinstated its original opinion, which gives political branches.... [more]
US transfers 2 Uighur Guantanamo detainees to Switzerland
March 24, 2010 by Michael Kraemer
Two Uighurs held at Guantanamo Bay were transferred to Switzerland on Wednesday. Switzerland granted humanitarian type B residence permits allowing the two to live in the canton of Jura. Both have agreed to respect Swiss laws, learn the local language, and secure gainful employment. The US.... [more]
Supreme Court declines to rule on Guantanamo detainee transfer process
March 22, 2010 by Jaclyn Belczyk
The US Supreme Court on Monday declined to rule in the case known as Kiyemba II, in which the court was asked to consider issues surrounding the transfer of Guantanamo Bay detainees. Lawyers for four Chinese Muslim Uighurs detained at Guantanamo were appealing an April ruling by the US Court of.... [more]
Uighur Guantanamo detainees seek remand to district court for new trial
March 5, 2010 by Steve Dotterer
Lawyers for seven Chinese Muslim Uighurs detained at Guantanamo Bay filed a motion Thursday to remand proceedings from the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to the US District Court for the District of Columbia. The motion comes just days after the US Supreme Court ordered.... [more]
Supreme Court sends Uighur case back to lower court
March 1, 2010 by Jaclyn Belczyk
The US Supreme Court on Monday ordered a lower court to reconsider the case of seven Chinese Muslim Uighurs detained at Guantanamo Bay. The court originally granted certiorari in Kiyemba v. Obama to determine whether it is within the power of the judicial branch to order the release of detainees.... [more]
Supreme Court seeks guidance on Uighur case after Swiss transfer announcement
February 13, 2010 by Bhargav Katikaneni
The US Supreme Court Friday ordered the Obama administration and lawyers for Chinese Uighurs detained at Guantanamo Bay to file briefs explaining how Switzerland's decision to accept two Uighurs as refugees affects their pending habeas petition. The Court originally granted certiorari in Kiyemb....... [more]
Obama administration argues Uighur Guantanamo detainee appeal now moot
February 7, 2010 by Ximena Marinero
The US Department of Justice (DOJ) on Friday urged the US Supreme Court to dismiss as moot an appeal filed by Chinese Muslim Uighurs detained at Guantanamo Bay. The court granted certiorari in the case, known as Kiyemba I, in October to determine whether it is within the power of the judicial.... [more]
Switzerland to accept 2 Uighur Guantanamo detainees
February 3, 2010 by Haley Wojdowski
The Swiss Federal Council announced Wednesday that it would accept two Uighur detainees from Guantanamo Bay. The council decided to admit the detainees for humanitarian reasons, despite the Chinese citizenship of both Uighurs and recent warnings by the Chinese Embassy in Switzerland that.... [more]
China warns Switzerland against accepting Uighur Guantanamo detainees
January 9, 2010 by Ximena Marinero
The Chinese Embassy in Switzerland on Friday warned that Switzerland would jeopardize relations with China by accepting two Uighur Guantanamo Bay detainees. Switzerland has already agreed to accept an Uzbek Guantanamo detainee, who will be relocated to the canton of Geneva, but authorities from.... [more]
|
|
|
|