"Because, like Hamdi, Padilla is an enemy combatant, and because his detention is no less necessary than was Hamdi's in order to prevent his return to the battlefield, the President is authorized by the AUMF (Authorization for Use of Military Force Joint Resolution) to detain Padilla as a fundamental incident to the conduct of war".
^^^^ War ? Judge Luttig, did Congress _declare_ war as required by the Constitution. (Citation omitted :>))
^^^
The opinion does in fact state that the Court thinks that in view of the facts it believes to have been established in the record, that this is a good idea -- Padilla's detention is militarily necessary, or he will escape to wage war on the U.S. again.
^^^^^ CB: I'd sure like to know if Judge Wittig thinks that the U.S. is constitutionally at war. Factually everybody seems to agree that the U.S. is at war. But , maybe I missed it, but I don't recall a Congressional declaration of war that anyone claimed meets the requirements of the Constitution. That would make this factually actual war an unconstitutional and I'd say, I don't know, criminal war.
I address this the culprits , not brother counsel. ^^^^^^