United States v. Ibrahim Ahmed Al-Hamdi, United States of America v. Ibrahim Ahmed Al-Hamdi

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• observing that contentions not raised in argument section of opening brief are abandoned
• refusing to review the State Department’s factual determination that the defendant was not entitled to diplomatic privileges and immunities at the time of his arrest, since the State Department’s certification was based on a reasonable interpretation of the Vienna Convention
• \It is a well settled rule that contentions not raised in the argument section of the opening brief are abandoned.\
• “It is a well settled rule that contentions not raised in the argument section of the opening brief are abandoned.”
• “Interpretation of an international treaty is an issue of law subject to de novo review.”
• “we hold that the State Department’s certification, which is based upon a reasonable interpretation of the Vienna Convention, is conclusive evidence as to the diplomatic status of an individual.” (emphasis added)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).