Shayana Kadidal, senior managing attorney of the Guantánamo Global Justice Initiative at the Center for Constitutional Rights, discusses the Supreme Court decision on the “material support” for terrorism case Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project, the Court’s continued deference to “wartime” decisions made by the executive and legislative branches, Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan’s lead role in arguing the government’s position in the case, why teaching the Tamil Tigers about representative democracy could land you in prison, the Clinton administration’s broadened application of economic sanctions and the wisdom in treating terrorists like criminals instead of waging a “war on terror.”
MP3 here. (19:25)
Shayana Kadidal is senior managing attorney of the Guantánamo Global Justice Initiative at the Center for Constitutional Rights in New York City. He is a graduate of the Yale Law School and a former law clerk to Judge Kermit Lipez of the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.
In his eight years at the Center, he has worked on a number of significant cases in the wake of 9/11, including the Center’s challenges to the detention of prisoners at Guantánamo Bay (among them torture victim Mohammed al Qahtani and former CIA ghost detainee Majid Khan), which have twice reached the Supreme Court (with a third case to be heard in March 2010), and several cases arising out of the post-9/11 domestic immigration sweeps.
He is also counsel in CCR’s legal challenges to the “material support” statute (to be argued at the Supreme Court in February 2010), to the low rates of black firefighter hiring in New York City, and to the NSA’s warrantless surveillance program.