Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
Articles 1 - 17 of 17
Full-Text Articles in Law
What To Do About The Torturers?, David Cole
What To Do About The Torturers?, David Cole
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
No abstract provided.
Rendition To Torture: The Case Of Maher Arar: Hearing Before The H. Comm. On Foreign Affairs,, 110th Cong., Oct. 18, 2007 (Statement Of David D. Cole, Geo. U. L. Center), David Cole
Testimony Before Congress
No abstract provided.
Brief Of Salim Hamdan As Amicus Curiae, Boumediene V. Bush & Al Odah V. United States, Nos. 06-1195 & 06-1196 (U.S. Aug. 24, 2007), Neal K. Katyal
Brief Of Salim Hamdan As Amicus Curiae, Boumediene V. Bush & Al Odah V. United States, Nos. 06-1195 & 06-1196 (U.S. Aug. 24, 2007), Neal K. Katyal
U.S. Supreme Court Briefs
No abstract provided.
Brief Of Legal Historians As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioners, Boumediene V. Bush, Nos. 06-1195, 06-1196 (U.S. Aug. 24, 2007), James Oldham
U.S. Supreme Court Briefs
No abstract provided.
The Defense Of Torture, David Luban
The Defense Of Torture, David Luban
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
No abstract provided.
Why The Court Said No, David Cole
Why The Court Said No, David Cole
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
No abstract provided.
Military Commissions: Hamdan V. Rumsfeld: Testimony Before The S. Comm. On Armed Services, 109th Cong., July 19, 2006 (Statement Of Neal Kumar Katyal, Prof. Of Law, Geo. U. L. Center), Neal K. Katyal
Testimony Before Congress
No abstract provided.
In Case Of Emergency, David Cole
In Case Of Emergency, David Cole
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
No abstract provided.
Brief For Petitioner Salim Ahmed Hamdan, Hamdan V. Rumsfeld, No. 05-184 (U.S. Jan. 6, 2006), Neal K. Katyal
Brief For Petitioner Salim Ahmed Hamdan, Hamdan V. Rumsfeld, No. 05-184 (U.S. Jan. 6, 2006), Neal K. Katyal
U.S. Supreme Court Briefs
No abstract provided.
Reply Brief For Petitioner, Hamdan V. Rumsfeld, No. 04-702 (U.S. Jan. 03, 2005), Neal K. Katyal
Reply Brief For Petitioner, Hamdan V. Rumsfeld, No. 04-702 (U.S. Jan. 03, 2005), Neal K. Katyal
U.S. Supreme Court Briefs
No abstract provided.
Brief Amici Curiae Of Legal Historians Listed Herein In Support Of The Petitioners, Rasul V. Bush, Nos. 03-334 & 03-343 (U.S. Jan. 14, 2004), James Oldham
U.S. Supreme Court Briefs
No abstract provided.
Brief Of International Law And Jurisdiction Professors As Amici Curiae Supporting Petitioners, Rasul V. Bush, Nos. 03-334 & 03-343 (U.S. Jan. 12, 2004), Barry E. Carter
Brief Of International Law And Jurisdiction Professors As Amici Curiae Supporting Petitioners, Rasul V. Bush, Nos. 03-334 & 03-343 (U.S. Jan. 12, 2004), Barry E. Carter
U.S. Supreme Court Briefs
No abstract provided.
The New Mccarthyism: Repeating History In The War In Terrorism, David Cole
The New Mccarthyism: Repeating History In The War In Terrorism, David Cole
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
This Essay will argue that the government has invoked two methods in particular in virtually every time of fear. The first, discussed in Part I, involves a substantive expansion of the terms of responsibility. Authorities target individuals not for what they do or have done but based on predictions about what they might do. These predictions often rely on the individuals' skin color, nationality, or political and religious associations. The second method, the subject of Part II, is procedural-the government invokes administrative processes to control, precisely so that it can avoid the guarantees associated with the criminal process. In hindsight, …
Security And Freedom: Are The Governments' Efforts To Deal With Terrorism Violative Of Our Freedoms?, David Cole
Security And Freedom: Are The Governments' Efforts To Deal With Terrorism Violative Of Our Freedoms?, David Cole
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
One of the most common things that is said about September 11th is that it changed everything. In some respects, that is true. In the most important respects it would be more accurate to say it has changed everything for some, far more than it has for others. One instance of that can be seen in a pole that National Public Radio did one year after September 11th. They asked people to what extent their life had changed. They asked them whether they had to give up any important rights or freedoms in the war on terrorism. Only seven percent …
In Aid Of Removal: Due Process Limits On Immigration Detention, David Cole
In Aid Of Removal: Due Process Limits On Immigration Detention, David Cole
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
In this Article, I seek to demonstrate the radical consequences that taking due process seriously would have for immigration detention as currently practiced. Part I lays out the general principles that apply to civil preventive detention, which establish that substantive due process is violated without an individualized showing after a fair adversarial hearing that there is something to prevent, namely danger to the community or flight. Part II applies this general framework to immigration detention. It first demonstrates, by a review of Supreme Court decisions, that the Court has applied the same due process principles to immigration detention that it …
Protecting Constitutional Freedoms In The Face Of Terrorism: Hearing Before The S. Comm. On The Judiciary, 107th Cong., Oct. 3, 2001 (Statement Of David D. Cole, Prof. Of Law, Geo. U. L. Center), David Cole
Testimony Before Congress
No abstract provided.
Brief Amici Curiae Of Legal Historians Listed Herein In Support Of Respondent, I.N.S. V. St. Cyr, No. 00-767 (U.S. Mar. 27, 2001), ., James Oldham
U.S. Supreme Court Briefs
No abstract provided.