Law Commons^™

Targeted Killing - Death By Drone, Jeffrey F. Addicott

Faculty Articles

Following the targeted killing of American born al-Qa’eda leader, Anwar al -Awlaki, targeted killings of American citizens has been a hotly contested issue. A targeted killing is defined as the “intentional, premeditated and deliberate use of lethal force, by states or their agents acting . . . against a specific individual who is not in the physical custody of the perpetrator.” The rule of law that justifies a state killing another human rests in either the law of war or the legal right of self-defense.

The term targeted killing is most often associated with the use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles …

The Strange Case Of Lieutenant Waddell: How Overly Restrictive Rules Of Engagement Adversely Impact The American War Fighter And Undermine Military Victory, Jeffrey F. Addicott

Faculty Articles

A rules of engagement (“ROE”) Review Board should be created in order to provide an impartial review process for service members facing adverse administrative action for violations of ROE. Politicians defining the ROE, rather than military experts, create rules that are so restrictive and confusing that they ultimately run counter to the military objective of victory. A violation of a ROE can be a criminal offense under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, but violations are issued arbitrarily, and often the military does not charge the service member with a crime, instead using adverse administrative measures to impose punishment.

While …

American Punitive Damages Vs. Compensatory Damages In Promoting Enforcement In Democratic Nations Of Civil Judgments To Deter State-Sponsors Of Terrorism, Jeffrey F. Addicott

Faculty Articles

The primary consequence of the attacks on 9/11 on the U.S. was a fundamental legal shift in the approach that the U.S. has taken when confronting terrorism and the States that support them. The new challenge of the post 9/11 approach focused on ways to effectively combat not only terrorist organizations but also the States that sponsor them. This new thinking demands that Western democracies adopt an internationally based functional legal methodology that can deter rogue States from sponsoring terrorism.

Civil litigation against States that sponsor or support terrorism is a potential legal tool which could be used with great …

Military Justice At Abu Ghraib, Jeffrey F. Addicott

Faculty Articles

Previous efforts to denigrate the credibility of U.S. war policies in the War on Terror pale in the wake of the prisoner abuse scandal at Abu Ghraib. Photographic evidence of American soldiers abusing detainees created a firestorm of allegations concerning illegal interrogation practices and threatened to derail fundamental legal and policy pillars upon which America conducts the War on Terror. It raised the question of whether the prison abuse reflected a systemic policy to illegally obtain information from detainees or isolated acts of criminal behavior by a handful of soldiers. Thanks to several investigative reports, the legal and policy pillars …

Into The Star Chamber: Does The United States Engage In The Use Of Torture Or Similar Illegal Practices In The War On Terror, Jeffrey F. Addicott

Faculty Articles

Because of the dangers presented by al-Qaeda style terrorism, the United States has crafted a variety of robust anti-terrorism responses. One of the more controversial of these is the indefinite detention of suspected enemy combatants, and the associated question as to whether the United States can and does employ torture.

Many prominent voices, such as Professor Alan Dershowitz, have advocated a judicial exception allowing torture as an interrogation tool in special instances, but the United States has struggled to find an appropriate balance between civil liberties and security concerns. To succeed in the War on Terror, the U.S. cannot allow …

Building Democracies With Southern Command’S Legal Engagement Strategy, Jeffrey F. Addicott, Guy B. Roberts

Faculty Articles

Fostering democracies and encouraging military establishments, which are subject to the rule of law, is vital to United States national security interests. In this regard, the American warfighting unified commands mirror the overall U.S. national security policy of peacetime engagement, not only by maintaining close contacts with friendly governments for the purpose of imparting democratic ideals and principles, but by focusing this commitment to support new democracies through detailed engagement plans.

U.S. Southern Command’s engagement plan for Latin America creates a “community of democratic, stable, and prosperous” nations. This plan also provides a blueprint for democracy-building in the context of …

Jag Corps Poised For New Defense Missions: Human Rights Training In Peru, Jeffrey F. Addicott

Faculty Articles

The National Command Authority has cited the dissolution of the Soviet Union as cause for the United States Military to expand its role. In addition to its traditional role of fighting wars, the military will take on new nontraditional roles promoting human rights and the rule of law throughout the world. These new military missions will include peacekeeping operations, humanitarian interventions, disaster relief missions, counter-drug activities, and nation-building activities.

As part of this initiative, the United States Judge Advocate General’s Corps (JAGC) provides legal assistance to the militaries of several emerging and struggling democracies. A number of foreign armies and …