Military, War, and Peace Commons^™

Executive Power, Drone Executions, And The Due Process Rights Of American Citizens, Jonathan G. D'Errico

Fordham Law Review

Few conflicts have tested the mettle of procedural due process more than the War on Terror. Although fiery military responses have insulated the United States from another 9/11, the Obama administration’s 2011 drone execution of a U.S. citizen allegedly associated with al-Qaeda without formal charges or prosecution sparked public outrage. Judicial recognition that this nonbattlefield execution presented a plausible procedural due process claim ignited questions which continue to smolder today: What are the limits of executive war power? What constitutional privileges do American citizens truly retain in the War on Terror? What if the executive erred in its judgment and …

Co-Parenting War Powers: Congress's Authority To Escalate Conflicts, Russell A. Spivak

West Virginia Law Review

This article argues that Congress has the ability to force a President to escalate military intervention when he is otherwise unwilling to do so. The article begins by exploring the constitutional powers at Congress's disposal-the Declare War Clause, the Taxing and Spending Clause, and the Commander-in-Chief Clause-and their historical application. It then establishes that, under Justice Jackson's Youngstown framework, the Executive would be acting in Category Three, meaning that the President may "rely only upon his own constitutional powers minus any constitutional powers of Congress over the matter." Citing multiple Article I clauses, this article argues that Executive action in …

Five Years Under The Veterans Judicial Review Act: The Va Is Brought Kicking And Screaming Into The World Of Meaningful Due Process, Lawrence B. Hagel, Michael P. Horan

Maine Law Review

I have been asked to give you the “veterans' perspective” on whether the Court of Veterans Appeals has served the purpose for which it was created by Congress and also to describe what additional steps the court might take to further the ends desired by veterans. This is no easy task. It is difficult not because I do not have a lot to say. It is difficult because it is a charge to speak, in a sense, for all veterans. In order to understand what I mean, I think it may be helpful to give you a little background on …

The Impact Of Judicial Review On The Department Of Veterans Affairs' Claims Adjudication Process: The Changing Role Of The Board Of Veterans' Appeals, Charles L. Craigin

Maine Law Review

In a March 1992 statement submitted to the Congress, the Deputy Secretary of Veterans Affairs described the impact of judicial review on the Department of Veterans Affairs (Department or VA) as “profound.” That description is still apt and applies with as much force to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board or BVA) as it does to the Department as a whole. Nothing has had as much impact on the Board as the Veterans' Judicial Review Act (VJRA). The VJRA established the United States Court of Veterans Appeals in 1988 and charged it with the review of decisions of the Board. …

Jurisdiction Of The United States Court Of Veterans Appeals: Searching Out The Limits, Frank Q. Nebeker

Maine Law Review

I have been asked to talk to you about the United States Court of Veterans Appeals-specifically, challenges and trends in defining the scope of the court's jurisdiction. As a brand-new court, and one without any antecedent, the court began to establish precedent to deal with all aspects of its jurisdiction. In fact, it is still very much in the process of setting such precedent. For the first time, the court brought the principle of stare decisis to the veterans' community. The principle required considerable readjustment within the Department of Veterans Affairs (Department or VA). The VA's regional offices and the …

Introductory Remarks, Donald N. Zillman

Maine Law Review

I am very pleased to welcome this distinguished company to the University of Maine School of Law and to Portland. I thank Chairman Cragin for bringing such a distinguished group to his law school. I thank the Maine Law Review for taking the sponsor's role and for insuring that the publication of our proceedings will take our thoughts far beyond this room. My interest in military law and veterans law as participant and scholar extends over the last twenty years. And so, when Chairman Cragin broached the idea of a conference to provide the first assessment of how the “new …

The Virtues Of Abstention: Separation Of Powers In Al-Nashiri Ii, Nicholas A. Dimarco

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Part I examines various scholarly approaches to judicial deference, then considers deference in the context of military commissions. In Part II, the history of military commissions in the United States is examined, paying particular attention to the extended dialogue among the coordinate federal branches that created the system currently in operation. The decision in Al-Nashiri II not to adjudicate a collateral attack on one of these commissions is the focus of Part III. That Part embraces the underlying jurisdictional challenge at stake in Al-Nashiri II, the development of abstention doctrine generally and as applied to the current commissions, …

Where Have All The Soldiers Gone? Observations On The Decline Of Military Veterans In Government, Donald N. Zillman

Maine Law Review

This Essay examines the consequences of the growing decline in the number of military veterans in positions of leadership in the federal government, most particularly in the United States Congress. In its visible form, this issue has given rise to popular debate in the last three presidential elections. Did Dan Quayle pull strings to get a safe post in the Indiana National Guard to avoid Vietnam service? Did Bill Clinton improperly evade the draft during Vietnam? Were veterans George Bush or Bob Dole better qualified to be President because of their combat service in World War II? In its less …

Why A President Cannot Authorize The Military To Violate (Most Of) The Law Of War, John C. Dehn

William & Mary Law Review

Waterboarding and “much worse,” torture, and “tak[ing] out” the family members of terrorists: President Trump endorsed these measures while campaigning for office. After his inauguration, Trump confirmed his view of the effectiveness of torture and has not clearly rejected other measures forbidden by international law. This Article therefore examines whether a President has the power to order or authorize the military to violate international humanitarian law, known as the “law of war.” Rather than assess whether the law of war generally constrains a President as Commander-in-Chief, however, its focus is the extent to which Congress requires the U.S. military to …

Congressional Authorization Of The Campaign Against Isil, Tyler Salway

Indiana Law Journal

I. THE BIRTH OF ISIL

II. CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORIZATION

A. EXPRESS AUTHORIZATION

1. METHODS OF INCLUSION

2. ISIL’S INCLUSION UNDER THE 9/11 AUMF

B. IMPLICIT AUTHORIZATION

III. ISIL AND THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY

CONCLUSION