I’m Jonathan Hafetz, an ACLU lawyer trying to represent a U.S. citizen being secretly detained by the Trump administration. AMA

3:25pm: That's a wrap! Thanks for all your great questions!

The U.S. military has been secretly detaining an American in Iraq for three months without charges or access to a court, even though he has asked for a lawyer. The Trump administration will not identify the citizen or say where exactly he is being held. The government is holding the American as an “enemy combatant” for allegedly fighting on behalf of ISIS in Syria, but it has not offered any evidence to justify his detention. The ACLU has filed a habeas corpus petition in federal court to challenge the U.S. citizen’s indefinite detention and to be put in secure contact with him to offer legal assistance. The government is refusing.Learn more

Proof: https://twitter.com/ACLU/status/939221543309029376

Comments: 123 • Responses: 2  • Date: 

apatheticviews14 karma

How did you become aware of this supposed citizen? Without a named person, it sounds difficult to ascertain whether the "detainee" even exists, or any of the follow-up questions.

"If" this occurring, it's horrible... but this "as stated" sounds like the boy who cried wolf.

jhafetz21 karma

Shout out here to Betsy Woodruff and Spencer Ackerman at the Daily Beast, who broke this story in September. Otherwise, it's possible no one would still know a US citizen is being locked up without access to a court or a lawyer. Here's the link: https://www.thedailybeast.com/us-military-american-isis-fighter-reportedly-surrenders

aclu4 karma

Here's the Daily Beast article that broke this story

Absobloodylootely6 karma

Hi, I was reading about this the other day since someone had linked ACLU's write-up of the case.

I studied international law in law school (private and public) and find the case very interesting.

Why is the government taking this step? Do they not care about the dangerous precedent they are setting?

Also, I have always been very critical of the way the US skirted around the Geneva convention. By the letter of the law the interpretation is dubious, and it gets even worse if one considers the spirit of the law. I warned about the slippery slope. Is this not a natural evolution of that original decision to reinterpret the law for political gain? From that it is easy to arrive at al-Awlaki, and from al-Awlaki it is easy to arrive at your current client.

jhafetz14 karma

The government appears not to care about the precedent its setting--or it simply wants the unchecked power. But as Justice O'Connor said, even a state of war is not "a blank check" when it comes to the rights of a US citizen.

Absobloodylootely7 karma

I am so glad you guys exist! One of the handful of organizations I donated to 9th November 2016. (and, yeah, time to do it again)

aclu4 karma

Thank you for your support!