PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 31, 2008
Enemy Combatant Detention Review Act of 2008 - Amends the federal judicial code to grant the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia exclusive jurisdiction of, and make it the exclusive venue for consideration of, all habeas corpus applications by or on behalf of any enemy combatant held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, who is neither a U.S. citizen nor a lawful permanent resident (covered individual) that are pending on or filed on or after the enactment of this Act. Prescribes related procedures, including restrictions on oral testimony.
Stays any such application until all Military Commission proceedings regarding the covered individual have been resolved.
Requires release of a covered individual, for whom the District Court grants a writ of habeas corpus and orders release, into the custody of the Secretary of Homeland Security for transfer to the individual's country of citizenship or another country.
People & committees
Rep. Smith, Lamar [R-TX-21] · R–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jan 21, 2026. 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.6705 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.6705 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.6705 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.6705 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.