––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
https://test.legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available
- Posted September 02, 2010
- Tweet This | Share on Facebook
News (AP) - Federal court refuses to rehear Guantanamo ruling

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A U.S. appeals court has again upheld the continued detention of a former cook for Taliban forces who said he never fired a shot in battle.
The full U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia on Tuesday refused to rehear a petition from Ghaleb Nassar Al Bihani.
He is a Yemeni citizen captured in Afghanistan and held at the U.S. naval base in Cuba since 2002.
A three-judge panel upheld his detention in January. Al Bihani had asked for the full court to reconsider, but the judges turned him down.
Al Bihani has conceded he helped prepare meals for foreign fighters allied with the Taliban in 2001.
Officials have said the court's decision could make it harder for Guantanamo detainees to challenge their confinement.
Published: Thu, Sep 2, 2010
headlines Oakland County
- Whitmer signs gun violence prevention legislation
- Department of Attorney General conducts statewide warrant sweep, arrests 9
- Adoptive families across Michigan recognized during Adoption Day and Month
- Reproductive Health Act signed into law
- Case study: Documentary highlights history of courts in the Eastern District
headlines National
- This LA lawyer levels up legal protections in the video game industry
- ACLU and BigLaw firm use ‘Orange is the New Black’ in hashtag effort to promote NY jail reform
- Legal champions to receive Spirit of Excellence Award at 2026 ABA Midyear Meeting
- Fake Sullivan & Cromwell entities used by scammers should be dissolved, suit says
- Hackers gained access to ‘small number’ of attorney emails at Williams & Connolly, firm confirms
- Before joining Anderson Kill, judge was accused of rude behavior on bench, retaliatory threats in ethics case