PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 4, 2009
Terrorist Detainees Protection Act of 2009 - Directs the President to ensure that by the end of calendar 2009 no person alleged to be an unlawful enemy combatant is detained at Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Requires a status review by a panel of three military judges of any Guantanamo detainee suspected of being an unlawful enemy combatant.
Requires that any person determined, pursuant to such a review, to be an unlawful enemy combatant to be: (1) transferred to a military or civilian detention facility in the United States, charged with a violation of U.S. or international law, and tried by courts-martial or in a district court; (2) transferred to an international tribunal operating under the authority of the United Nations with jurisdiction to hold trials of such a person; (3) transferred to a NATO-run detention facility, or to a different country, provided there are adequate assurances that the person will not be subject to torture in that country; or (4) held in accordance with the law of armed conflict. Provides for the disposition of other detainees after status reviews, including possible release.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Repeals the prohibition on habeaus corpus for detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Expresses the sense of Congress that the judicial review of all applications for writs of habeas corpus brought by detainees that are pending as of the date of enactment of this Act should be suspended until the completion of the status reviews.
Repeals the Military Commissions Act of 2006.
Requires the President to report to Congress any recommendations for statutory changes necessary to implement a comprehensive federal policy governing the apprehension, detention, trial, transfer, release, or other disposition of individuals captured or apprehended in connection with armed conflicts and counterterrorism operations.
People & committees
Rep. Schiff, Adam B. [D-CA-29] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties.
Referred to House Judiciary
Referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to House Armed Services
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1315 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1315 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1315 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1315 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.