Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Law
Of Civil Wrongs And Rights: Kiyemba V. Obama And The Meaning Of Freedom, Separation Of Powers, And The Rule Of Law Ten Years After 9/11, Katherine L. Vaughns, Heather L. Williams
Of Civil Wrongs And Rights: Kiyemba V. Obama And The Meaning Of Freedom, Separation Of Powers, And The Rule Of Law Ten Years After 9/11, Katherine L. Vaughns, Heather L. Williams
Katherine L. Vaughns
This article is about the rise and fall of continued adherence to the rule of law, proper application of the separation of powers doctrine, and the meaning of freedom for a group of seventeen Uighurs—a Turkic Muslim ethnic minority whose members reside in the Xinjiang province of China—who had been held at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base since 2002. Most scholars regard the trilogy of Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, and Boumediene v. Bush as demonstrating the Supreme Court’s willingness to uphold the rule of law during the war on terror. The recent experience of the Uighurs suggest that …
The Taint Of Torture: The Roles Of Law And Policy In Our Descent To The Dark Side, David Cole
The Taint Of Torture: The Roles Of Law And Policy In Our Descent To The Dark Side, David Cole
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Was the Bush administration’s decision to employ “enhanced interrogation techniques” a mistake of policy, a violation of law, or both? This essay responds to Philip Zelikow’s insider account of how the decision to use these techniques was reached. The author suggests that while Zelikow makes a strong case that the decision to authorize the CIA to use coercive interrogation tactics was a mistaken policy judgment, it is important not to lose sight of the fact that it was also illegal. The latter conclusion demands a different response than the former. In particular, it underscores the necessity for accountability. The author …
The Evolution Of Law And Policy For Cia Targeted Killing, Afsheen John Radsan
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 …
Due Process In American Military Tribunals After September 11, 2001, Gary Shaw
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?"
Sow What You Reap? Using Predator And Reaper Drones To Carry Out Assassinations Or Targeted Killings Of Suspected Islamic Terrorists, Thomas M. Mcdonnell
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 …
A Functional Approach To Targeting And Detention, Monica Hakimi
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 …
Where Liberty Lies: Civil Society And Individual Rights After 9/11, David Cole
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 …
Detention Debates, Deborah N. Pearlstein
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 …