A Q&A on the Guantanamo ruling

About 270 men are at the Guantanamo Bay naval base in southern Cuba -- 19 already charged with war crimes and 250 or so being held without charges, many for more than six years. Habeas corpus is a constitutionally guaranteed right to challenge detention, but the Pentagon has denied it to the terrorism suspects at Guantanamo. These prisoners now get a day in court before a federal judge who will determine whether the government has enough evidence of crimes to warrant keeping them in custody. If the judges find the government lacks the legal grounds to hold the men, the prisoners must be released.

How does the decision affect those already charged with war crimes, including confessed Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed?

The 19 detainees identified for trial by military commissions will not be immediately affected by the court ruling. The government has shown grounds for holding those men in the charges against them. Justice Department spokesman Peter Carr said that the military trials continue to go forward and that any legal issues emanating from the high court's ruling will be litigated before the military commissions themselves.

Legal analysts point out that the U.S. District Court hearings for the 250 or so not yet charged could define more clearly what constitutes an "enemy combatant," or disqualify evidence derived through torture or coercion. That would give defense lawyers the opportunity to challenge the tribunal's legality or jurisdiction.

What did lawyers for the detainees say after the court's decision?

Lawyers representing the Guantanamo prisoners in the habeas corpus petitions predicted that, in many of the cases, the government would be unable to prove to the civilian judges that it had sufficient or reliable evidence of crimes. Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, which represents many of the detainees in their habeas challenges, said he expected "a high number" of the 250 would be released after the District Court reviews.

What does the Supreme Court ruling signal for the future of the detention and interrogation facilities at Guantanamo?