Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
How Safe Is Too Safe? Exemption 7(F) And The Withholding Of Critical Documents, Grant Snyder
How Safe Is Too Safe? Exemption 7(F) And The Withholding Of Critical Documents, Grant Snyder
Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law
The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) is one of the main tools used by the American public to investigate the actions of its government. Congress created FOIA in an attempt to make most government documents available to the public. Today, the FOIA process favors government withholding. This bias comes from institutional issues in courts’ review of FOIA challenges.
In the environmental and administrative law context, federal agencies use many exemptions to withhold government records from citizen and non-profit groups. Agencies that are tasked with permitting and regulating energy pipelines and other environmentally-sensitive infrastructure now regularly cite Exemption 7(F). These agencies …
Contemporary Practice Of The United States Relating To International Law, Kristina Daugirdas, Julian Davis Mortenson
Contemporary Practice Of The United States Relating To International Law, Kristina Daugirdas, Julian Davis Mortenson
Articles
In this section: Congress Enacts Sanctions Legislation Targeting Russia • United States and Qatar Sign Memorandum of Understanding over Terrorism Financing • Trump Reverses Certain Steps Toward Normalizing Relations with Cuba • United States Announces Plans to Withdraw from Paris Agreement on Climate Change • President Trump Issues Trade-Related Executive Orders and Memoranda • United States, Russia, and Jordan Sign Limited Ceasefire for Syria • Trump Administration Recertifies Iranian Compliance with JCPOA Notwithstanding Increasing Concern with Iranian Behavior
Toward Comprehensive Reform Of America's Emergency Law Regime, Patrick A. Thronson
Toward Comprehensive Reform Of America's Emergency Law Regime, Patrick A. Thronson
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
Unbenownst to most Americans, the United States is presently under thirty presidentially declared states of emergency. They confer vast powers on the Executive Branch, including the ability to financially incapacitate any person or organization in the United States, seize control of the nation's communications infrastructure, mobilize military forces, expand the permissible size of the military without congressional authorization, and extend tours of duty without consent from service personnel. Declared states of emergency may also activate Presidential Emergency Action Documents and other continuity-of-government procedures, which confer powers on the President-such as the unilateral suspension of habeas corpus-that appear fundamentally opposed to …
Weakening The Bill Of Rights: A Victory For Terrorism, Stephen Reinhardt
Weakening The Bill Of Rights: A Victory For Terrorism, Stephen Reinhardt
Michigan Law Review
What is most remarkable about Richard Posner's latest book-and he has written many-is that he argues that we should repose full confidence in the executive branch to handle the most sensitive constitutional issues of our time without once mentioning the flagrant breaches of law and critical falsehoods with which President Bush and his administration have deluged the public since 9/11. This only seven years after he composed a lengthy tome regarding President Clinton's impeachment in which he appropriately, if harshly, condemned the president for his unethical and illegal conduct, principally his deliberate lies and purposeful lack of candor with the …
Checks And Balances In Wartime: American British And Israeli Experiences, Stephen J. Schulhofer
Checks And Balances In Wartime: American British And Israeli Experiences, Stephen J. Schulhofer
Michigan Law Review
Three years after an attack that traumatized the nation and prompted massive military and law-enforcement counter-measures, we continue to wrestle with the central dilemma of the rule of law. Which is more to be feared - the danger of unchecked executive and military power, or the danger of terrorist attacks that only an unconstrained executive could prevent? Posed in varying configurations, the question has already generated extensive litigation since September 11, 2001, and a dozen major appellate rulings. Last Term's Supreme Court trilogy - Rasul v. Bush, Hamdi v. Rumsfeld and Rumsfeld v. Padilla - clarified several important points …
Catastrophic Terrorism- Thinking Fearfully, Acting Legally, Barry Kellman
Catastrophic Terrorism- Thinking Fearfully, Acting Legally, Barry Kellman
Michigan Journal of International Law
The time has come to move beyond howls of alarm to a public discussion of what policies should be adopted or reformed. That discussion should proceed even as crucial questions remain only partially answerable: How realistic is the possibility of catastrophic terrorism? How easy is it to make a catastrophic device that actually works? Why would any person or group want to kill hundreds, thousands, or tens of thousands of innocent victims?