Whether a federal employee's detention without criminal charges, under military administrative procedures, violates constitutional due process protections and the right to habeas corpus

No question identified. : BOTTOM LINE UP FRONT (BLUF) Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 13.5, Petitioner Martin Akerman, Pro Se, respectfully requests a 40-day extension of time to file a petition for writ of certiorari. Akerman was detained on February 14, 2022, under the provisions of 5 U.S. Code § 6329b. A subsequent suspension on April 24, 2022, under 5 U.S. Code § 7513, was executed without proper legal procedures and was allegedly approved by a high-ranking officer of the Nevada National Guard, Brigadier General Caesar Garduno. The petitioner's continued detention since February 14, 2022, without being charged with a crime, represents a serious constitutional issue, including the suspension of due process under 5 U.S. Code § 7513(b) (1), its distinction from 5 U.S. Code § 7532, and the suspension of habeas corpus for aliens labeled as enemy combatants, a critical balance between individual rights and national security, 28 U.S. Code § 2241(e). The Jurisdictional Question, informed by 28 U.S.C. § 2254, underscores procedural fairness issues, particularly the necessity of properly identifying respondents in habeas cases. On April 25, 2023, the applicant learned new information indicating that it was not General Garduno who confirmed the unlawful detention, giving rise to the filing of Habeas case DC-0752-23-0457-S-1 with the Merit Systems Protection Board. (1)