Final answer:
NCOs' authority under the UCMJ and MCM does not directly pertain to the Supreme Court rulings on enemy combatants and habeas corpus rights, but such cases highlight the broader military justice system. The Fifth and Sixth Amendments ensure due process in the military, as upheld by the UCMJ and MCM.
Step-by-step explanation:
The ability of Non-Commissioned Officers (NCOs) to apprehend persons subject to trial by court-martial under the Manual for Courts-Martial (MCM) is a topic grounded in military law. However, the query specifically requests information related to the powers exercised under the provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and the MCM, which traditionally governs the conduct and responsibilities of military personnel.
While the question engages with the realm of law, it should be noted that the Supreme Court rulings mentioned, such as the authority to name persons as enemy combatants or the challenges to habeas corpus rights, indirectly shed light on the broader military justice system and powers of arrest and detention under military authority during wartime or national emergencies. However, these cases do not directly address the specific authority of NCOs in apprehending individuals.
The Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and by extension the amendments' applications to military personnel, ensure due process and the right against self-incrimination. These principles are upheld within the military justice system, as provided by the UCMJ and MCM, to ensure that even within the military, individuals are not unlawfully detained or deprived of their liberty without due process.