Kristine A. Huskey
Kristine A. Huskey |
|---|
Kristine Huskey is an American lawyer.[1]
Studies
[edit | edit source]| 1992 | B.A. Columbia University |
| 1997 | J.D. University of Texas School of Law |
Professional career
[edit | edit source]Huskey has served as a visiting professor, at various institutions, specializing in human rights, including[1]:
- American University Washington College of Law
- Victoria University of Wellington, Faculty of Law
- George Washington University Law School
Huskey worked for the large New York-based law firm Shearman & Sterling. It was while working at Shearman & Sterling that Huskey volunteered to help defend Guantanamo captives. Huskey was one of the lawyers who worked on Rasul v. Bush.[1]
Huskey had worked for Canadian Guantanamo captive Omar Khadr, one of the ten captives who has faced charges before a Guantanamo military commission.[2] Huskey is the author of "Standards and Procedures for Classifying “Enemy Combatants”: Congress, What Have You Done?" -- published by the Texas International Law Journal.[3] Huskey wrote an article entitled: "The administration has already begun trying to work its way around the Supreme Court's Hamdan decision", in the American Prospect.[4]
In an interview with the Council on Hemispheric Affairs Huskey said[2]:
- “It’s so easy to say that they are terrorists and that terrorists don’t deserve rights, but because they were never given rights to begin with, like the right to a fair trial for instance, how did we reach the decision that they are even terrorists?”
Huskey told WJLA that she received death threats because of her work helping Guantanamo captives.[5] WJLA reported that Huskey paid 13 visits to Guantanamo.
References
[edit | edit source]- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 "Kristine Huskey: Practitioner in Residence, International Human Rights Clinic". University of Washington College of Law. Retrieved 2007-07-14.
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 "COHA: Guantanamo and the Semantics of Terror". Scoop News. 2024-03-26. Retrieved 2025-12-02.
- ↑
Kristine A. Huskey (Fall 2007). "Standards and Procedures for Classifying "Enemy Combatants": Congress, What Have You Done?". Texas International Law Journal. Retrieved 2008-04-29.
When I began down this road five years ago, Guantánamo was literally a “legal black hole.”1 The Supreme Court changed much of that in June of 2004 when it ruled in my case, Al Odah v. United States, joined with Rasul v. Bush,2 that the detainees were entitled to bring habeas corpus petitions in federal court to challenge their detention. But after two years of fighting with the government over the meaning of Rasul, Congress abruptly passed the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (“MCA”),3 which ostensibly strips the Guantánamo detainees of the right to challenge any aspect of their detention, including the right to habeas corpus. Remarkably, we are almost exactly where we were five years ago, except that now, Congress has weighed in and approved of Guantánamo as a virtual law-free zone.
- ↑
Kristine A. Huskey (August 13 2006). "The administration has already begun trying to work its way around the Supreme Court's Hamdan decision". American Prospect. Retrieved 2007-07-14. Check date values in:
|date=(help) - ↑ "Working Women: Kristine Huskey". WJLA. 2007-07-06. Retrieved 2007-07-14.