The name below in part 2 will be familiar to most.

---------------------------------------
The first part deals with the question of Federal judicial control over the MCA system before a final judgment by a MCA military commission. The detainees (minor players) in that case have not been charged. The case does have possible implications for the MCA process.

Circuit Court holds firm on DTA review
Monday, August 25th, 2008 10:40 am | Lyle Denniston
....
UPDATE 3:30 p.m. There have been other developments in detainees’ cases; they are discussed in the continuation of the post below.
.....
1. A hearing scheduled in U.S. District Court Tuesday morning could provide a major test of whether Congress has taken away from the federal courts any authority to oversee the war crimes trial system before there are final verdicts. Thomas F. Hogan, a senior District judge who is coordinating detainees’ habeas cases in District Court, will hold a hearing at 11 a.m. on a plea by attorneys for two Guantanamo prisoners to prevent military prosecutors from meeting with the captives without their lawyers’ consent.
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/circuit...on-dta-review/

In an ordinary criminal case, this one would be a no-brainer once the defendant lawyers-up. As noted above, the Federal courts are being forced to deal with the issue of who (measured by status) is entitled to certain constitutional rights.

Detainees' motion brief here.

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-cont...ion-7-2-08.pdf

Government's brief here.

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-cont...ari-7-8-08.pdf

Detainees' reply here.

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-cont...ly-7-10-08.pdf

Note that, if the detainees themselves had a trial pending before a MCA commission, the Federal judge would have a simple answer: don't ask me; ask your military judge for a protective order.

--------------------------------
From the same source as above, we have the five accused man-eaters coming to bat:

2. In a new development affecting the war crimes prosecution of five individuals accused of taking part in the 9/11 attacks — including alleged mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, defense lawyers asked for added time to file legal motions. Under a present schedule, such motions would be due on Friday of this week. The attorneys asked that the deadline be put off until Nov. 25, contending that the cases that could lead to the death penalty for each of the five accused are so complex — and lawyers’ access to the clients is so restricted — that counsel cannot mount an adequate defense in the time available.
KSM's motion (3+MB) is here.

http://www.aclu.org/pdfs/safefree/us...nforrelief.pdf