Law Commons^™

Due Process In American Military Tribunals After September 11, 2001, Gary Shaw

Touro Law Review

The Authorization for Use of Military Force ("AUMF") provides broad powers for a president after September 11, 2001. President Bush, under the AUMF, claimed he had the power to hold "enemy combatants" without due process. This gave rise to two questions that the article addresses: "Could they be held indefinitely without charges or proceedings being initiated? If proceedings had to be initiated, what process was due to the defendants?"

National Security Federalism In The Age Of Terror, Matthew C. Waxman

Faculty Scholarship

National security law scholarship tends to focus on the balancing of security and liberty, and the overwhelming bulk of that scholarship is about such balancing on the horizontal axis among branches at the federal level. This Article challenges that standard focus by supplementing it with an account of the vertical axis and the emergent, post-9/11 role of state and local government in American national security law and policy. It argues for a federalism frame that emphasizes vertical intergovernmental arrangements for promoting and mediating a dense array of policy values over the long term. This federalism frame helps in understanding the …

Terrorism Financing Indicators For Financial Institutions In The United States, Richard K. Gordon

Faculty Publications

At least since the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) first published its Forty Recommendations, financial institutions in FATF-compliant jurisdictions have been required to implement preventive measures that require FIs to identify customers, establish client profiles, monitor for unusual transactions, review those transactions to see if there was suspicion that they involved the proceeds of crime and, if so, report the transaction to the authorities in the form of a suspicious transaction report (STR). When these requirements were first established, neither financial institutions nor their supervisors/regulators had much experience as to what in a client's profile and the client's patterns of …

Detention Debates, Deborah N. Pearlstein

Michigan Law Review

Since the United States began detaining people in efforts it has characterized, with greater and lesser accuracy, as part of global counterterrorism operations, U.S. detention programs have spawned more than 200 different lawsuits producing 6 Supreme Court decisions, 4 major pieces of legislation, at least 7 executive orders across 2 presidential administrations, more than 100 books, 231 law review articles (counting only those with the word "Guantanamo" in the title), dozens of reports by nongovernmental organizations, and countless news and analysis articles from media outlets in and out of the mainstream. For those in the academic and policy communities who …

Technological Leap, Statutory Gap, And Constitutional Abyss: Remote Biometric Identification Comes Of Age, Laura K. Donohue

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Federal interest in using facial recognition technology (“FRT”) to collect, analyze, and use biometric information is rapidly growing. Despite the swift movement of agencies and contractors into this realm, however, Congress has been virtually silent on the current and potential uses of FRT. No laws directly address facial recognition—much less the pairing of facial recognition with video surveillance—in criminal law. Limits placed on the collection of personally identifiable information, moreover, do not apply. The absence of a statutory framework is a cause for concern. FRT represents the first of a series of next generation biometrics, such as hand geometry, iris, …

Where Liberty Lies: Civil Society And Individual Rights After 9/11, David Cole

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Had someone told you, on September 11, 2001, that the United States would not be able to do whatever it wanted in response to the terrorist attacks of that day, you might well have questioned their sanity. The United States was the most powerful country in the world, and had the world’s sympathy in the immediate aftermath of the attacks. Who would stop it? Al Qaeda had few friends beyond the Taliban. As a historical matter, Congress and the courts had virtually always deferred to the executive in such times of crisis. And the American polity was unlikely to object …

The First Amendment’S Borders: The Place Of Holder V. Humanitarian Law Project In First Amendment Doctrine, David Cole

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project, the Supreme Court’s first decision pitting First Amendment rights against national security interests since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the Court appears to have radically departed from some of the First Amendment’s most basic principles, including the maxims that speech may not be penalized because of its viewpoint, that even speech advocating crime deserves protection until it constitutes incitement, and that political association is constitutionally protected absent specific intent to further a group’s illegal ends. These principles lie at the core of our political and democratic freedoms, yet Humanitarian Law Project …

The War On Terror: Where We Are And How We Got There, Michael B. Mukasey

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Sow What You Reap? Using Predator And Reaper Drones To Carry Out Assassinations Or Targeted Killings Of Suspected Islamic Terrorists, Thomas M. Mcdonnell

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This article explores whether targeted killing of suspected Islamist terrorists comports with international law generally, whether any special rules apply in so-called “failed states,” and whether deploying attack drones poses special risks for the civilian population, for humanitarian and human rights law, and for the struggle against terrorism. Part I of this article discusses the Predator Drone and its upgraded version Predator B, the Reaper, and analyzes their technological capabilities and innovations. Part II discusses international humanitarian law and international human rights law as applied to a state’s targeting and killing an individual inside or outside armed conflict or in …

Assassination Or Targeted Killings After 9/11, John Yoo

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Judicial Foreign Relations Authority After 9/11, Martin S. Flaherty

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Functional Approach To Targeting And Detention, Monica Hakimi

Articles

The international law governing when states may target to kill or preventively detain nonstate actors is in disarray. This Article puts much of the blame on the method that international law uses to answer that question. The method establishes different standards in four regulatory domains: (1) law enforcement, (2) emergency, (3) armed conflict for civilians, and (4) armed conflict for combatants. Because the legal standards vary, so too may substantive outcomes; decisionmakers must select the correct domain before determining whether targeting or detention is lawful. This Article argues that the "domain method" is practically unworkable and theoretically dubious. Practically, the …

A Tale Of Two Brothers: The Impact Of The Khadr Cases On Canadian Anti-Terrorism Law, Robert Currie

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

After something of a slow start, Canada’s post-9/11 terrorism laws have seen a fair amount of traffic over the last several years, and many of these prosecutions were high-profile in both the public and the legal senses. The case of the “Toronto 18” was well-chewed over by the press, coverage oscillating between grim amusement at the apparent incompetence of some of the accused and the sobering danger presented by others. The Supreme Court of Canada recently granted leave to appeal in the cases of Momin Khawaja, who was convicted for various terrorist activities carried out within and outside Canada, and …

Responses To The Five Questions, Charles J. Dunlap Jr.

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Labeling Mexican Cartels As Terrorist Organizations, Jeffrey F. Addicott

Faculty Articles

Given the increased danger to persons, property, and civil order posed by Mexican drug cartels, some have asked whether these cartels can be categorized as terrorist organizations. While a legal argument might be crafted for designating the drug cartels as such, the failure of the international community to provide a universal definition of the term coupled with the negative connotations associated with America’s war on the terrorist network al-Qa’eda discourages such a move.

If Mexican drug cartels are labeled by American officials as “terrorists,” many would immediately assume that the correct rule of law that the United States might employ …

Mission Creep In National Security Law, Fletcher N. Baldwin Jr., Daniel R. Koslosky

UF Law Faculty Publications

Many anti-terrorism measures are enacted with broad public support. There is often a general willingness on the part of the public to accept greater civil liberties deprivations in the face of a specific threat, or otherwise in times of general crisis, than would otherwise be the case. Sweeping anti-terrorism legislation is frequently crafted in reaction to the presence, or perceived presence, of immense, imminent danger. The medium and long-term consequences of the legislation may not fully be comprehended when political leaders and policymakers take swift action in the face strong public pressure in light of a recent terrorist attack or …

The Evolution Of Law And Policy For Cia Targeted Killing, Afsheen John Radsan

Faculty Scholarship

Many critiques of the Central Intelligence Agency’s alleged use of killer drones depend on law that does not bind the United States or on contestable applications of uncertain facts to vague law. While acknowledging a blurry line between law and policy, we continue to develop a due process for targeted killing. In the real world, intelligence is sometimes faulty, mistakes occur, and peaceful civilians are at risk. International humanitarian law, which applies during armed conflicts, demands very little in the way of process beyond the admonition to take feasible precautions. Even so, the intelligence-driven nature of targeted killing, and the …

Rightly Dividing The Domestic Jihadist From The Enemy Combatant In The “War Against Al-Qaeda” – Why It Matters In Rendition And Targeted Killings, Jeffrey F. Addicott

Faculty Articles

The United States must be able to distinguish between common criminals and unlawful enemy combatants and then apply the appropriate rule of law to each category with unabashed clarity.

The confusion associated with comprehending fundamental legal concepts associated with how America conducts the "War on Terror" centers around the unwillingness of the U.S. government to properly distinguish al-Qaeda unlawful enemy combatants from domestic jihadi terrorists. Instead, the terms "domestic terrorist," "domestic jihadist," or just "terrorist," are frequently employed to describe all categories of actors--unlawful enemy combatants as well as common criminals--leaving both domestic and international audiences puzzled as to what …

Preventing Atoms For Peace From Becoming Atoms Of Terror: The National Environmental Policy Act Is Not A Vehicle For Addressing Terrorism, David D. Leege

Catholic University Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Public Health Approach To Understanding And Preventing Violent Radicalisation., K Bhui, M Hicks, M Lashley, E Jones

Madelyn Hsiao-Rei Hicks

No abstract provided.

On The Language Of (Counter)Terrorism And The Legal Geography Of Terror, Nick J. Sciullo

Nick J. Sciullo

In this paper, I will discuss the difficulties in defining a place for the global war on terror and the implications this lack of terrestrial bounds has for the law. I will then discuss the way language impacts not only the idea of terrorism, but also the politics of place. On our journey will be philosophers Martin Heidegger and Jacques Derrida, discussed extensively below, who help flesh out the important politics of language and place. Ultimately, I will urge for a deconstructive approach to the global war on terror, which I hope will encourage a more thoughtful consideration of the …

Dangerous Precedent: America's Illegal War In Afghanistan, Ryan T. Williams

Ryan T. Williams

Osama bin Laden’s death has lead many to question the efficacy of America’s continued fighting in Afghanistan. Too often dismissed is any meaningful discussion of the legality of the war on terror in Afghanistan, where the U.S. has promised to keep fighting until at least 2014. The use of force in international law is generally forbidden, except under three circumstances: in self-defense, pursuant to a United Nations Security Council resolution, or with consent from the leader of an invaded state. After a careful examination of all three, it is apparent that America’s continued fighting in Afghanistan, more than a decade …