The court stated a lot of history in that decision. "Unlawful combatants" can also be spies. The guy came to do "recon". That is "spying".
Throughout history spies have been hung. Starting with the revoulutionary war, the war of 1812, the Civil War.
This is nothing new. No precident -- we've been there, done that.
This is what the US Supreme Court upheld, if you can't see the difference in these cases, then I just don't know what to tell you.
"1)That the charges preferred against petitioners on which they are being tried by military commission appointed by the order of the President of July 2, 1942, allege an offense or offenses which the President is authorized to order tried before a military commission. (2) That the military commission was lawfully constituted. (3)That petitioners are held in lawful custody, for trial before the military commission, and have not shown cause for being discharged by writ of habeas corpus.? The motions for leave to file petitions for writs of habeas corpus are denied. The orders of the District Court are affirmed. The mandates are directed to issue forthwith.
Big difference here! What trial? What Lawful Military Tribunal?