Oklahoma Law Review Volume 71 Number 4 2019 Detaining ISIS: Habeas and the Phantom Menace Ernesto Hernández-López Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.ou.edu/olr Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, and the Military, War, and Peace Commons Recommended Citation Ernesto Hernández-López, Detaining ISIS: Habeas and the Phantom Menace, 71 OKLA. L. REV. 1109 (2019), https://digitalcommons.law.ou.edu/olr/vol71/iss4/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by University of Oklahoma College of Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Oklahoma Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Oklahoma College of Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact
[email protected]. DETAINING ISIS: HABEAS AND THE PHANTOM MENACE ERNESTO HERNÁNDEZ-LÓPEZ* Abstract The United States detained “John Doe,” an American citizen, in Iraq without charges for over a year. He was released in October of 2018. Challenging this detention, Doe filed a habeas petition. He argued that the detention was illegal because statutory authority is needed to detain citizens, and military detention depends upon Congress formally authorizing the anti-ISIS conflict. Doe contended that these conditions did not exist. The United States argued that the detention was legal because Doe was an enemy combatant that supported ISIS in Syria. This case, Doe v. Mattis, raised significant constitutional questions about citizens, executive detention, and deference in national-security and foreign- relations matters. But much more remains at stake in terms of overseas power and military force. This Article argues that Doe’s prolonged detention is the expected result of legal ambiguities of American authority overseas.