Law Commons^™

Newsroom: Interrogation Expert Warns Against Use Of Torture 2-2-2018, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

The Constitution And National Security, Erwin Chemerinsky

Erwin Chemerinsky

No abstract provided.

Presidential Powers Including Military Tribunals In The October 2005 Term, Erwin Chemerinsky

Erwin Chemerinsky

No abstract provided.

A Human Rights Perspective To Global Battlefield Detention: Time To Reconsider Indefinite Detention, Yuval Shany

International Law Studies

This article discusses one principal challenge to detention without trial of suspected international terrorists—the international human rights law (IHRL) norm requiring the introduction of an upper limit on the duration of security detention in order to render it not indefinite in length. Part One of this article describes the “hardline” position on security detention, adopted by the United States in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 terror attacks (followed, with certain variations, by other countries, including the United Kingdom and the State of Israel), according to which international terrorism suspects can be deprived of their liberty without trial for the …

War By Legislation: The Constitutionality Of Congressional Regulation Of Detentions In Armed Conflicts, Christopher M. Ford

Northwestern University Law Review

In this essay, Ford considers provisions of the 2016 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) which place restrictions on the disposition of detainees held in Guantánamo Bay. These provisions raise substantial separation of powers issues regarding the ability of Congress to restrict detention operations of the Executive. These restrictions, and similar restrictions found in earlier NDAAs, specifically implicate the Executive's powers in foreign affairs and as Commander in Chief. Ford concludes that, with the exception of a similar provision found in the 2013 NDAA, the restrictions are constitutional.

Hamad V. Gates And The Continuing Interpretation Of Boumediene: A Note On 732 F.3d 990 (9th Cir. 2013), Paul Blenz

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

A particularly prevalent type of claims in post-Boumediene cases are Bivens claims by detainees. One such case is Hamad v. Gates. Hamad represents a typical claim made by such detainees, and is the focus of this note. In Hamad, the Ninth Circuit held that a statute that had previously thought to be entirely overruled by Boumediene actually survived. This statute, 28 U.S.C. § 2241(e), stemmed from years of back-and-forth debate between the Supreme Court and Congress. The result of this conflict is still unsettled. The main issue is whether the Court’s primary concern in overruling the jurisdiction-stripping statutes of Congress …

Foolish Consistencies And The Appellate Review Of Courts-Martial, John F. O'Connor

Akron Law Review

The thesis of this Article is that most of the vices infesting the military appellate system could be corrected, or at least moderated, by reforming the rules governing when, and how, a servicemember can waive his right to appellate review...Part II of this Article examines the “costs” associated with the appeal of a court-martial conviction, that is, the resources that are required to bring a case through its appellate review. When a courtmartial appeal presents colorable issues that the accused has a moral right to raise (not having waived them at trial), these are “costs” that are well worth expending. …

Rationalizing The Constitution: The Military Commissions Act And The Duboius Legacy Of Ex Parte Quirin, Chad Deveaux

Akron Law Review

Alexander Hamilton famously characterized the Judiciary as the “least dangerous” branch. It “has no influence over either the sword or the purse” and thus “must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments.” But this perceived safeguard has sometimes proven to be the institution’s undoing. Faced with the prospect of appearing impotent, the Supreme Court has, on occasion, played the role of doctrinal apologist. The Court has bent seemingly immutable constitutional prerogatives to sanction Executive action when a contrary ruling would likely go unheeded.

Presidential Powers Including Military Tribunals In The October 2005 Term, Erwin Chemerinsky

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Constitution And National Security, Erwin Chemerinsky

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

In Search Of A Forum For The Families Of The Guantanamo Disappeared, Peter Honigsberg

Peter J Honigsberg

The United States government has committed grave human rights violations by disappearing people during the past decade into the detention camps in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. And for nearly thirty years, beginning with a 1983 decision from a case arising in Uruguay, there has been a well-developed body of international law establishing that parents, wives and children of the disappeared suffer torture, or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment (CID).

This paper argues that the rights of family members were severely violated when their loved ones were disappeared into Guantanamo. Family members of men disappeared by the United States have legitimate claims …

Obama's Failed Attempt To Close Gitmo: Why Executive Orders Can't Bring About Systemic Change, Erin B. Corcoran

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

No Virtue In Passivity: The Supreme Court And Ali Al-Marri, Bruce K. Miller

Faculty Scholarship

This Article discusses the case of Al-Marri v. Spagone, which the U.S. Supreme Court unjustifiably dismissed as moot on March 6, 2009. By dismissing this appeal, the Court ignored its duty to determine whether the military detention of a non-citizen residing lawfully in the United States was authorized by law. And that failure has in turn contributed significantly, and unnecessarily, to the cloud of legal uncertainty which now hovers over the preventive detention measures adopted and proposed by the Obama Administration.

Three Strikes And You're Outside The Constitution: Will The Guantanamo Bay Alien Detainees Be Granted Fundamental Due Process?, Michael Greenberger

Michael Greenberger

The United States Supreme Court has agreed to take up its first case arising from the War on Terror by hearing the consolidated appeals of two groups of foreign aliens who are or who had been detained at the United States Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, Cuba: Rasul v. Bush (No. 03-334) and Al Odah v. United States (No. 03-343). The cases stem from the United States' capture of several hundred prisoners in Afghanistan and Pakistan and their subsequent imprisonment at Guantanamo Bay. The prison began operation in January 2002, and approximately 90 detainees have been freed up to this time, …

The Case Against National Security Courts, Stephen I. Vladeck

Stephen I. Vladeck

Since September 11, calls for a hybrid national security court to handle special terrorism cases have taken on a new-found prominence, as courts and policymakers alike have struggled with the complex series of legal and logistical problems posed by the U.S. government's detention of enemy combatants, especially the hundreds of non-citizens so detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. National security courts are, for many, an increasingly attractive compromise solution to the seemingly irreconcilable division between those who believe that terrorism suspects are not entitled to the traditional criminal process and those who believe not only that they are, but that any …

Inside Guantanamo, Peter J. Honigsberg

Peter J Honigsberg

In May 2007 I visited Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. What I saw and experienced then are fading away and will soon disappear, now that two-thirds of the nearly 800 detainees have been released and President Obama will close the detention centers within the year. Consequently, this essay provides a historical account of one person's media visit to Guantanamo, when it was a fully-operational prison violating human rights, due process and international law.

The essay describes not only the visit but also the application process -- a bizarre experience. The military's application concluded with two quotes from the New Testament and included …

The Story Of Downes V. Bidwell: "The Constitution Follows The Flag ... But Doesn't Quite Catch Up With It", Pedro Malavet

Pedro A. Malavet

A study of the principal decision of the Insular Cases of 1901, which has provided constitutional authorization for the U.S. territorial empire for over a century. The cases were most recently referenced by the U.S. Supreme Court in its 2008 opinion in Boumediene v. Bush.

Detention And Interrogation In The Post-9/11 World, Kermit Roosevelt Iii

All Faculty Scholarship

Our detention and interrogation policies in the wake of the terrorist attacks of 9/11 have been a disaster. This paper, delivered as a Donahue Lecture at Suffolk University Law School in February 2008, explores the dimensions and source of that disaster. It first offers a clear and intelligible narrative of the construction and implementation of executive detention and interrogation policy and then analyzes the roles played by the different branches of government and the American people in order to understand how we have ended up in our current situation.

Who's Afraid Of Geneva Law?, Aya Gruber

Publications

According to many internationalists, the terrorism detention cases Hamdi v. Rumsfeld and Hamdan v. Rumsfeld are exemplary of a movement on the part of the Supreme Court toward greater incorporation of and respect for international law. Recent death penalty cases, statements of individual justices, and the increasing transnationalism of the Court's docket have lead many to believe, as Justice Ginsburg does, that the Court's "island or lone ranger mentality is beginning to change." This Article takes the contrary position that Hamdi and Hamdan are not internationalist because of their meticulous avoidance of the issue of Geneva Convention self-execution. Briefly, the …

Chasing 'Enemy Combatants' And Circumventing International Law: A License For Sanctioned Abuse, Peter J. Honigsberg

Peter J Honigsberg

In 1944, in Korematsu v. United States, the Supreme Court made a major error in judgment. It ruled that the executive may forcibly remove over 110,000 Japanese Americans from their homes and relocate them in American detention camps. In two recent Supreme Court cases, Hamdi v. Rumsfeld and Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, the court made similar errors in judgment by accepting the administration's term "enemy combatant." The Supreme Court's errors were compounded when Congress passed the Military Commissions Act of 2006 in October, 2006, statutorily defining the term enemy combatant for the first time. By acknowledging the term enemy combatant, the …

Raising The Red Flag: The Continued Relevance Of The Japanese Internment In The Post-Hamdi World, Aya Gruber

Publications

In the years since the terrorist attacks of September 11th, the Japanese interment has re-emerged as a topic of serious discourse among legal scholars, politicians, civil libertarians, and society in general. Current national security policies have created concerns that the government has stepped dangerously close to the line crossed by the Roosevelt administration during World War II. Civil libertarians invoke the internment to caution policy-makers against two of the most serious dangers of repressive national security policies: racial decision-making and incarceration without process. Bush defenders advance several arguments in response to internment comparisons. The most conservative is an ardent defense …

Three Strikes And You're Outside The Constitution: Will The Guantanamo Bay Alien Detainees Be Granted Fundamental Due Process?, Michael Greenberger

Faculty Scholarship

The United States Supreme Court has agreed to take up its first case arising from the War on Terror by hearing the consolidated appeals of two groups of foreign aliens who are or who had been detained at the United States Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, Cuba: Rasul v. Bush (No. 03-334) and Al Odah v. United States (No. 03-343). The cases stem from the United States' capture of several hundred prisoners in Afghanistan and Pakistan and their subsequent imprisonment at Guantanamo Bay. The prison began operation in January 2002, and approximately 90 detainees have been freed up to this time, …

Punishment And The War On Terrorism, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

Certain features of the war on terrorism impose novel and controversial punishment schemes. For example, President George W. Bush has unilaterally invoked executive authority to detain thousands suspected of terrorism over protracted times and to create military tribunals. The government has imprisoned two American citizens, denying them access to counsel for more than a year, and it has incarcerated 650 individuals without process at Guantanamo Bay. Bush administration officials recently announced that they would try some Guantanamo detainees in military commissions; however, these bodies will accord fewer protections than the civilian system or even courts-martial under the Uniform Code of …

An Essay On The Spirit Of Liberty In The Fog Of War, Patrick L. Baude

Articles by Maurer Faculty

This article previews the Supreme Court's decision in the Guantánamo prisoners' cases, arguing they should be dismissed for failure of jurisdiction. The worst possible outcome for civil liberties in wartime would be a decision to adjudicate the rights of the prisoners under an anemic view of individual rights and judicial jurisdiction. It is evident that the Court will not apply a robust conception of due process to these cases, in light of the inevitable pressures of national security in wartime. But faint-hearted judicial review, the likely result, will foster the political illusion that business as normal for our constitutional system …