In one sense, the decision in Boumediene v Bush is a limited one. It does not order the release of a single prisoner – indeed, no prisoner has been released by court order in the six years that men have been held at Guantanamo. Nor does it address the scope of the President's authority to hold individuals as "enemy combatants," what procedural protections they are owed, or how they should be treated. It simply opens the courthouse door. Six years after Guantanamo opened, detainees will finally get their day in court.
As a result of that law, the Military Commissions Act, the court was confronted with the question of whether Guantanamo detainees have a constitutional right to habeas corpus, that is, one that cannot be taken away unless Congress suspends the writ in times of "rebellion or invasion."
But reality was on the side of the detainees. Guantanamo has long become a symbol of Bush administration lawlessness in the "war on terror."

The prison camp has become such an embarrassment for the US around the world that President Bush, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice have all said they would like to see it closed, and both presumptive presidential candidates, Barack Obama and John McCain, have said they would shut it down. The Supreme Court was simply unwilling to go along with an administration position that has effectively declared war on the very heart of what the court is about – the rule of law.

What does this mean for the detainees? More waiting, to be sure. As noted at the outset, much remains unresolved. But the bottom line should now be clear: Guantanamo is no longer a law-free zone.