26. In the case, Rasul v. Bush (2004), the Supreme Court ruled:
a. that noncitizen detainees who have been declared enemy combatants and detained in areas controlled by
the U.S. cannot petition for habeas corpus in federal courts.
b. that noncitizen detainees who have been declared enemy combatants and detained in areas controlled by
the U.S. can petition for habeas corpus in federal courts.
c. that noncitizen detainees who have been declared enemy combatants must be tried in federal courts in the
U.S.
d. that the right to habeas corpus is suspended during war time.
27. Concerning the law of interrogating terrorist suspects:
a. it is clear that the U.S. Constitution requires terrorist suspects be treated the same as criminal suspects.
b. the definition of what constitutes torture is clear.
c. there is no clear definition of torture or what violates the Constitution.
d. there is consensus that torture is legal when interrogating persons suspects of planning terrorist acts on
American soil.
28. One of the primary differences between interrogating criminal suspects and suspected terrorists, which impacts
whether the interrogation techniques are legal is:
a. the suspected terrorist will most likely be a noncitizen and the criminal suspect most likely be a citizen.
b. the terrorist suspect may be detained outside the U.S. and the criminal suspect is in the U.S.
c. law enforcement officers question criminal suspects and intelligence officers question suspected terrorists.
d. for criminal suspects the issue is whether a confession is admissible in court to establish guilt; for terrorists
suspects the issue is getting information to prevent a future attack.