In the Case Hamdi V

In the case Hamdi v. Rumsfield (2004) , in which Hamdi, an American citizen, was declared an enemy combatant and detained without formal charges or proceedings, the Supreme Court ruled:

A) that the government was not required to provide him any rights normally given to citizens facing criminal charges.
B) the government has complete discretion to use whatever procedures are necessary in situations involving enemy combatants, even those who are U.S. citizens.
C) because he is a U.S. citizen, Hamdi is entitled to all of the rights provided to persons facing criminal charges.
D) as a citizen who is detained as an enemy combatant, he must receive notice of the reasons for this classification and a fair opportunity to rebut the government's assertions before a neutral decision maker.