In this weekend’s Wall Street Journal (subscription required), law professor Richard Epstein of the University of Chicago argues that the Congress has unconstitutionally “suspended” the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus for alien unlawful enemy combatants. Unfortunately for Professor Epstein, his argument has already been decisively refuted by Andy McCarthy here at NRO and by Adam White at the Weekly Standard. For an explanation of why Epstein has so badly mistaken the applicable legal principles, I recommend “Claims and Counterclaims” by David Rivkin and Lee Casey in Thursday’s Wall Street Journal (also subscribers-only, unfortunately). As Rivkin and Casey explain, those who argue for patently mad notions, such as full-fledged habeas rights in any and all civilian courts for our captured battlefield enemies, fail to see that we are truly at war, not engaged in a law-enforcement enterprise.