Trivia: The outdoor sign on the Guantanamo Bay fence stating "DO NOT HARM THE IGUANAS PENALTY $10,000" is not a joke! The U.S. implemented the "Endangered Species Act" at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba because the Act also applies to species abroad and because the U.S. leases the land (for about $4,000 per year). Ironically, detainees at Guantanamo Bay who started arriving there in 2002 were not afforded U.S. due process protections, giving iguanas more protection than the people detained there. (00:38:05)
Trivia: Having a writ of habeas corpus filed may offer someone allegedly unlawfully detained hope for getting released, but only a small percentage (around 3%) of the petitions filed are granted and, if granted, it means the person's case will be reviewed; the detainee is NOT very likely to actually be released from confinement.
Trivia: Critics assert a writ of habeas corpus no longer functions to protect people against unlawful detention. Instead, it enables the government to ignore Constitutional rights and engage in unlawful detention of certain people indefinitely - that is, at least until a writ of habeas corpus is actually filed and granted for review. This is similar to the view that the 4th Amendment does not protect against unreasonable searches and seizures - police can violate but not use anything seized in court.
Trivia: The "writ of habeas corpus" used to be referred to as the "Great Writ." Despite its potential value of protecting against unlawful detention and indefinite confinement without due process of law, it has actually been suspended four times since ratified and detainees at Guantanamo Bay were not originally eligible to file a writ of habeas corpus because of where they were confined (i.e, in Cuba, not the United States).
Trivia: Translations for the Latin HABEAS CORPUS include "show me the body", "you have the body", "you should have the body", "produce the body", and "you shall have the body." The "body" in question refers to a person being held in detention or confinement and "show the body" refers to the judge/court being requested (petitioned) to bring the person to court to ascertain/assess the legality of the person's deprivation of liberty. No person should be deprived of liberty without "due process of law."
