Boumediene, a further thought

In addition to the points I covered in an earlier post on that decision, there is also the question of the military commission that tried the detainees in Eisentrager. In Eisentrager, SCOTUS stated-

The other claim is that they were denied trial "by the same courts and according
to the same procedure as in the case of persons belonging to the armed forces of
the detaining Power," required by Article 63 of the Convention. It may be noted
that no prejudicial disparity is pointed out as between the Commission that
tried prisoners and those that would try an offending soldier of the American
forces of like rank.

Although the specific procedures aren't mentioned, that fact that the court didn't find a significant difference between the commission in question and one that would try American soldiers suggests that, unlike the commissions in Gitmo, the one here made the minimal standards of a fair hearing. Which brings us to the subject of Justice Roberts's dissent.