Wrong. As a consequence of losing Rasul v. Bush, the administration has raced to establish military tribunals to regularize the status of detainees at Gitmo, who were there soley under the "powers" of the executive with no judicial review whatsover. BTW duly constituted military tribunals are regarded as a judicial process for these purposes.
But they hardly qualify as judicial review, because this is all part of the executive branch. The Constitution says that the judicial powers are to be vested in the judicial branch (i.e., judges serving during good behavior), and that criminal prosecutions shall be by impartial juries - the whole nine yards. If those requirements can be disregarded for the sake of national security, why can't the same be done for the habeas corpus requirement, which has its own built-in escape clause for national security?