The case of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld arose from Salim Ahmed Hamdan's detention at Guantanamo Bay, where he was being held as an alleged enemy combatant. The Bush administration had established military commissions to try detainees, asserting that these commissions were necessary for national security. Hamdan challenged the legality of the military tribunals, arguing they violated U.S. laws and international treaties governing the treatment of prisoners. The issues at stake included the rights of detainees, the definition of lawful combat, and the extent of presidential power in wartime. The Supreme Court heard the case, resulting in a 5-3 decision. Chief Justice John Roberts recused himself, while Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, along with her colleagues, emphasized the importance of rules established by both U.S. law and international conventions. The Court concluded that the military commissions were unconstitutional because they deviated from the established military justice system outlined in the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Furthermore, the Court found that the tribunals did not provide the defendants the necessary protections guaranteed under the Geneva Conventions, which are designed to protect individuals who are not taking a direct part in hostilities.