Law Commons^™

Prosecuting The War On Terror In The Trump Administration: The Trump Doctrine: Is There Really A New Sheriff In Town, Jeffrey F. Addicott

Faculty Articles

After one full year in office, it is time to examine the actions taken by the Trump Administration in light of its legal and policy structures for dealing with the War on Terror and the companion problem of radical Islamic terrorism-both the domestic and international threat. In this context, two general concepts bear examination. First, is there a significant change in the Trump Administration from the policies of the Bush and Obama Administrations vis a vis prosecuting the War on Terror and dealing with domestic jihadists? Second, has the Trump strategic vision and attendant actions contributed in any significant way …

Impact Of Data On Litigation: Enhancing Cybersecurity In The Private Sector By Means Of Civil Liability Lawsuits - The Connie Francis Effect, Jeffrey F. Addicott

Faculty Articles

In order to explore the threats posed by cybersecurity breaches, first outline the steps taken by the government to address those threats in private sector economy, and then call attention to the ultimate solution, which will most certainly spur private businesses to create a more secure cyber environment for the American people - a Connie Francis-styled cyber civil action lawsuit. Technological advances opened up the unfathomable marvels of cyberspace and, by so doing, spawned a modern world that is now completely dependent on cyber, particularly in the context of sustaining and operating our critical infrastructure. Unfortunately, if supervisory control and …

Using A Civil Suit To Punish/Deter Sponsors Of Terrorism: Connecting Arafat & The Plo To The Terror Attacks In The Second Intifada, Jeffrey F. Addicott

Faculty Articles

Civil litigation has fantastic potential to punish acts of terror and to deter future acts. However, there exists a conundrum regarding the establishment of the factual connection between the regime that secretly sponsors or supports terror and the actual acts of terror. To hold a regime responsible for terrorism, accountability must be established.

The ongoing civil action of Sokolow v. The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) perfectly illustrates this dilemma—on the one hand the offending regime disavows acts of terror while on the other hand it secretly supports and orchestrates terror. However, Yasser Arafat, President of the Palestinian National Assembly (PNA), …

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 …

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 …

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 …

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 …

Electronic Surveillance Of Terrorism: The Intelligence/Law Enforcement Dilemma - A History, William Funk

Faculty Articles

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) has been much in the news. Because the requirements for a judicial warrant under FISA do not require the traditional showings for electronic surveillance for law enforcement purposes, one of the issues relating to EISA is the extent to which surveillance under that Act may be undertaken for the purposes of criminal law enforcement, rather than for obtaining foreign counterintelligence or counterterrorism information. This issue became particularly salient after 9/11 when at the administration's urging Congress passed an amendment to KISA in the USA PATRIOT Act that eliminated the previous requirement that "the purpose" …

Proposal For A New Executive Order On Assassination, Jeffrey F. Addicott

Faculty Articles

Both clarity and respect for the rule of law demands that a new executive order on assassination be enacted that properly defines the term “assassination” and is couched in the legal parameters of self-defense. In prosecuting the War on Terror, the United States has confronted myriad issues concerning how best to deal with the new threat of al-Qaida-styled terrorism and those rogue nations that support terrorism. The two principle documents associated with these concerns are the National Security Strategy of the United States of America ("National Security Strategy") released by the White House on September 17, 2002 and Executive Order …

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 …