Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507, is a U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that even people detained as enemy combatants have the constitutional right to challenge their detention before a neutral decision maker.
In the case, the Petitioner was an American citizen who was designated as an “enemy combatant” by the government, and he was placed into indefinite confinement at Guantanamo Bay. The Court of Appeals ruled against Hamdi. However, the Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Fourth Circuit and held that even in times of war, the country must retain its values and the privileges of citizenship. The Court held that even citizens declared as “enemy combatant” have due process rights to notice of factual basis for their classification and to fair opportunity to rebut government's factual assertions before neutral decision makers.
[Last updated in February of 2022 by the Wex Definitions Team]