10. It has long been accepted practice by our military authorities to treat those who, during time of war,pass surreptitiously from enemy territory into our own, discarding their uniforms upon entry, for the commission of hostile acts involving destruction of life or property, as unlawful combatants punishable as such by military commission. This practice, accepted and followed by other governments, must be regarded as a rule or principle of the law of war recognized by this Government by its enactment of the Fifteenth Article of War. P. 35 .
How does the bolded part apply in this case? If not, how does Quirin supply the justification for designating Padilla as an unlawful combatant?
Looking forward to any/all responses.
(Note: This is in no way intended to support Padilla's actions or his character.)
Surreptitious? Abdullah Al Muhajir
Discarding uniforms? Terrs don't wear them. In the old days, if a soldier discarded his uniform in enemy territory, he could be shot as a spy. Many Germans were, in the Ardennes.
Unlawful combatants? If so declared enemy combatant, President or Congress has authority to try them via military commission.
Not exactly spelled out in great detail by SCOTUS in Ex Parte Quirin, for future generations. Or "different wars" as we are told this one is. But most cases/rulings don't give future parameters, precisely anyway.