If he should be charged with anything, it should be treason. If treason can't be proved, then he should be treated as a POW.I think the point is that there should be some kind of due process where the Administration must present the facts that an American citizen had taken up arms against this country, and the citizen in question has the ability to challenge the facts. Otherwise, the precedent is set for an Administration (not necessarily this one) to declare just about ANYONE an enemy combatant, whether or not they actually are, and they have no ability to defend themselves under the Constitution.
If the Administration makes it case, then hose the sumbitch.
I agree the enemy combantant designation must be clarified or its got to go. However, my problem with giving Hamdi a hearing is that you can not have criminal procedings against a prisoner of war. It is a violation of the Geneva Convention.
I don't think any Al-Qaeda types in the US should recieve enemy combatant status. They must be dealt with according to the Constitution, a trial by a jury of American citizens.
Your idea that Bush has to prove that Hamdi is a POW is a good one, but I'm not sure its legal under International law.