Is the prison camp at Guantanamo “outside the law”?

Guantanamo has been described — famously and often — as “outside the law,” or “beyond the
law,” or a “legal black hole.” It is, indeed, well established that prisoners were brought there
precisely so that they could remain under US control while having little or no rights within US or
international law. But things are not so simple. Over time, the detained men did win certain legal
rights in US federal courts. By the same token, so many of the abuses they suffered — however
abhorrent and seemingly “illegal” — were deemed legal by the US Executive (the president and
executive branch institutions) or even the courts. Further, some have argued that a kind of
lawlessness or legal ambiguity, justified within a “state of exception,” is a permanent feature of
state power
This deceptively simple question asks you to reflect on the relationship between Guantanamo,
torture, state violence, the state, the law, and (possibly) empire. You have rich texts to draw
from: the film Outside the Law, the Kaplan’s “Where is Guantanamo?,” Ahmad’s, “Resisting
Guantanamo: Rights at the Brink,” and Butler’s “Indefinite Detention.” You absolutely need not
master the complex legal history of Guantanamo! Your task is a thoughtful understanding of the
place of Guantanamo within American power, politics, and law. Your answer should reference at
least three separate texts.