Ex parte Quirin is shakey at best in its application to this case.
First, only one of the 8 Germans was a U.S. citizen. So the case of those seven doesn’t apply.
As for the one that was a U.S. citizen, the case hinged on war powers of the POTUS. We aren’t in a declared war and the current POTUS has declared publicly that the war on terror is over. We have specifically stated that we are not at war with Islam and we clearly are not currently at war with Russia.
Like many SCOTUS decisions, this one is heavily flawed. It draws no distinction between citizens and noncitizens. How does a citizen prove that they are not a foreign combatant, if they are not afforded Constitutional rights? Indeed, why are they having to prove their innocence in order to get a customary trial?
Providing the POTUS the ability to declare citizens to be less than citizens defeats the entire purpose of the Constitution. Constitutional protections are intended to keep us safe, no matter who is elected.
The other seven aren't in question. Only the one who was a U.S. citizen -- just like Dzhokhar Tsarnaev.
As for the one that was a U.S. citizen, the case hinged on war powers of the POTUS. We aren’t in a declared war and the current POTUS has declared publicly that the war on terror is over.
Ah, but we are. The Resolution for The Use of Military Force IS a "declaration of war".
And there are specified formal measures that have to be taken in order to end a war -- starting with a formal process declaring the "end of hostilities" and requiring Congressional assent. Bush took this step in Iraq.
Obama may have said the War on Terror was over...but he has never formally ended it. In Afghanistan or anywhere else. We remain in a state of war with the forces of Islamic Terror.
Amen.