the complaint alleged that Yoo, as a Justice Department attorney, participated in policy decisions and rendered legal opinions that ultimately authorized federal officials to designate Padilla as an enemy combatant, take him into military custody, hold him incommunicado without access to the courts or counsel and subject him to both coercive interrogation techniques and harsh conditions of confine ment, in violation of his constitutional and statutory rights. Padilla and Lebrón acknowledge that at the time Yoo served as Deputy Assistant Attorney General at OLC, there did not exist a “single judicial opinion,” id. at 2083, holding that a United States citizen held in military detention as an enemy combatant possessed rights against the kind of 2, 102 S.Ct. 2452, 73 L.Ed.2d 28 (1982) (<HOLDING>); Hydrick v. Hunter, 500 F.3d 978, 989 (9th
holding that a prisoners right of access to the courts encompasses only a reasonably adequate opportunity to file nonfrivolous legal claims challenging his conviction or conditions of confinement recognizing a liberty interest in reasonably safe conditions of confinement holding that punitive conditions of pretrial confinement implicate due process holding prisoners constitutional right of access to courts guarantees only a reasonably adequate opportunity to file nonfrivolous legal claims challenging their convictions or conditions of confinement holding that mentally retarded individuals who are involuntarily committed to a state institution have a constitutional right to reasonably safe conditions of confinement under the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment because pjersons who have been involuntarily committed are entitled to more considerate treatment and conditions of confinement than criminals whose conditions of confinement are designed to punish