In August 2006, for example, the top lawyer at the在2006年8月，举例来说，顶端律师在 State Department 国务院 told senior officials at the White House that unless they won a congressional mandate that broadly supported their system of detaining terrorism suspects, their goal of keeping the detainees locked up was in jeopardy.告诉高级官员在白宫表示，除非他们赢得了国会的任务，得到广泛支持他们的系统拘留恐怖嫌疑人，他们的目标，保持被拘留者关起来是处于危险之中。 “I can virtually guarantee you, without a legislative basis, federal courts are not going to be willing to uphold the indefinite detention of unlawful combatants,” “我几乎可以向你保证，如果没有立法的基础上，联邦法院不打算愿意坚持无限期拘留的非法战斗人员” John B. Bellinger III 约翰乙bellinger三 warned in an e-mail.警告，在一份电子邮件。

The e-mail, disclosed by former White House officials familiar with the intense internal debates over detainee policy, was one of several red flags for the White House in its fierce battle to keep the detention facility in Cuba free of judicial oversight.电子邮件透露，由前白宫官员熟悉激烈的内部争论，被拘留者的政策，是一个数的红旗为白宫在其激烈战斗，以保持拘留所，在古巴自由的司法监督。

The result, they said, has been a series of losses at the Supreme Court, including last week’s 5 to 4 ruling that detainees at Guantanamo have a constitutional right to a review of their detention in federal courts — a ruling that holds out the prospect of heavy litigation and close judicial scrutiny of decision-making that the administration has long argued is best left to the president.结果他们说，遭到了一系列的损失，在最高法院，包括上周的5至4月裁决，认为关押在关塔那摩有一个宪法权利，以检讨其被拘留的美国联邦法院-裁决，认为出展望沉重的诉讼和密切的司法审查的决策时表示，政府当局已久辩称是最好留给主席。

“Through misjudgment and overreaching, the White House ended up with the very result it sought to avoid — heavy judicial involvement and erosion of deference to the president’s view of wartime necessities,” said Matthew Waxman, who worked on detainee affairs at the State Department and “通过误判和overreaching ，白宫结束与它的结果非常试图避免-沉重的司法介入和侵蚀听从总统的看法，战时必需品，说： ”马修韦克斯曼，谁的工作就被拘留事务的国家署和 the Pentagon 五角大楼 before leaving last fall to teach law at临走去年秋天，教导法 Columbia University 哥伦比亚大学 . 。

“The administration pursued the policy course it wanted,” said former State Department counselor “政府奉行的政策，当然要，说： ”前国务院参事 Philip D. Zelikow 弘四zelikow , who was involved in some of the debates over detainee policy. ，谁是所涉及的一些争论被拘留者的政策。 “It planned for the best instead of preparing for the worst, and decided that it would prefer to fight for what it wanted.” “该公司计划争取最好的，而是准备最坏的打算，并决定它宁愿去争取什么，它想” 。

Even some conservative allies of the administration agree that the White House may have mishandled elements of its strategy, but they pin most of the blame for the administration’s predicament on the leanings of the Supreme Court.即使是一些保守的盟友，政府当局同意，白宫可能有处理不当的要素，其战略，但他们的PIN大部分归咎于政府当局的困境，就倾向的最高法院。

“It may well be fair to fault the Bush administration politically for failing to work with Congress early on to develop a statutory framework governing Guantanamo detainees,” said M. Edward Whelan III, a former Bush Justice Department official who now heads the Ethics and Public Policy Center. “这可能是公平的故障，布什政府在政治上未能与国会合作年初就制定一个法定架构，规管关塔那摩囚犯说： ”米何承天惠兰三，布什的前司法部官员现在谁元首伦理和公共政策中心。 “But the narrow Supreme Court majorities in the Guantanamo cases deserve far harsher criticism for their gross misreadings of the law and their abandonment of sound precedent on which the administration reasonably relied.” “但狭窄的最高法院的多数在关塔那摩的个案，值得到目前为止，严厉的批评，他们总误读的法律和放弃健全的先例，而政府当局合理地倚赖” 。

White House officials said it is unfair to second-guess their strategy, given the narrow divisions on the court.白宫官员称，这是不公平的第二个猜测他们的策略，鉴于狭窄告上法庭。 “I don’t think it takes a rocket scientist to say there was a chance that the administration could lose this case,” said one top official involved in detainee policy, referring to last week’s ruling. “我不认为它需要火箭科学家说，有机会时表示，政府当局可能会失去这种情况下，说： ”一高级官员所涉及的被拘留者的政策，是指在上周的裁决。 But he argued that “it would be very unusual for a Congress and executive branch to formulate national security policy based on the expectation that the Supreme Court would misinterpret the Constitution.”但他辩称： “这将是非常不寻常的一个国会和行政部门制定国家安全政策的基础上，预期最高法院会曲解宪法” 。

From the days soon after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the Bush administration has been divided over what to do with从天后不久， 2001年9月11日，攻击，布什政府一直分歧怎么办与 al-Qaeda 盖达组织 and和 Taliban 塔利班 members and others picked up in Afghanistan and elsewhere.成员和其他拾起在阿富汗和其他地方。 Hundreds of terrorism suspects were sent to the naval facility at Guantanamo Bay on the theory that it would be easier to keep them outside the formal US court system.数百名恐怖主义嫌疑人已被送往海军设施在关塔那摩湾上的理论，会更容易让他们以外正式向美国法院系统。

Administration officials debated whether the detainees were protected by the Geneva Conventions; whether the president could order detentions without an act of Congress; and whether the detainees had the right to appeal their detentions.政府官员讨论是否被拘留者受日内瓦公约;主席是否可下令拘留的一项国会法案，以及是否被拘留者的上诉权利，他们拘留。

A key issue for the White House was maximizing the power of the president — a motivation that led the administration into a troubled Supreme Court strategy, according to several participants in these debates.一个关键问题，白宫正在最大限度总统权力-的动机，导致政府成为一个困扰，最高法院的策略，根据几位与会者在这些辩论。 A turning point, they said, came in 2004, when the Supreme Court announced that it would review whether the government could hold Yaser Esam Hamdi, a US citizen whom the administration considered an enemy combatant, without trial or charge.一个转折点，他们说，来到2004年，当最高法院宣布，它将检讨政府是否可以举行yaser esam哈姆迪，美国公民，其中，政府当局认为，敌方战斗人员，未经审判或收费。

Jack L. Goldsmith, then head of the杰克属金，然后头部的 Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel 司法部的法律顾问办公室 , wrote in his book “The Terror Presidency” of a White House meeting he attended in February of that year in which写道，在他的著作“恐怖院长会议”的白宫会议上，他出席了在2月的这一年中， Paul D. Clement 保罗四克莱门特 , of the solicitor general’s office, warned that the administration might lose the case before the Supreme Court, despite its “solid legal arguments.” Goldsmith said he suggested that the administration seek a congressional sign-off for the entire detention program, something that would make it harder for the court to strike down the program. ，律师一般的办公室，警告说，政府可能会失去案之前，最高法院，尽管其“坚实的法律论点” 。戈尔德史密斯说，他建议政府当局寻求国会签署小康，为整个拘留的计划，一些这将使更难为法院打击的计划。