Law Commons^™

Eighteen Years Of Detention At Guantánamo Bay: Compliance With International Law Or The Specter Of Tyranny?, Dru Brenner-Beck

American University International Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reflections On Forty Years Of Private Practice And Sustained Pro Bono Advocacy, Stephen H. Oleskey

Maine Law Review

I am going to address two topics. The first is the one Judge Coffin asked me to address in October 2009, when I was invited to give the 2010 Coffin Lecture: how to combine the private practice of law with an active pro bono practice. The second topic is the one Dean Peter Pitegoff and I agreed to add: a brief discussion of legal developments in national security law since 9/11. My pro bono involvement in Guantanamo Habeas litigation began in 2004 and led directly to my interest in national security law and to my recognition of how difficult it …

Detention By Armed Groups Under International Law, Andrew Clapham

International Law Studies

Does international law entitle armed groups to detain people? And what obligations are imposed on such non-state actors when they do detain? This article sets out suggested obligations for armed groups related to the right to challenge the basis for any detention and considers some related issues of fair trial and punishment. The last part of this article briefly considers the legal framework governing state responsibility and individual criminal responsibility for those that assist armed groups that detain people in ways that violate international law.

Detention Of Australia’S Asylum Seekers In Nauru: Is Deprivation Of Liberty By Any Other Name Just As Unlawful?, Azadeh Dastyari

Azadeh Dastyari

This article will examine the detention of Australia’s asylum seekers in Nauru. In particular, this article will assess the conformity of the 2013 MOU between Australia and Nauru with the protections against unlawful deprivation of liberty under the Constitution of Nauru and the protections against arbitrary detention afforded to asylum seekers under international law.

The article will begin by discussing the transfer of asylum seekers by Australia to Nauru and the legality of this arrangement under Australian municipal law. The article will then discuss the arrangements for asylum seekers once they are in Nauru. It will demonstrate that the confinement …

Torturous Transfers: Examining Detainee Habeas Jurisdiction For Nonremoval Challenges And Deference To Diplomatic Assurances , Kristin E. Slawter

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Judicial Review For Enemy Fighters: The Court's Fateful Turn In "Ex Parte Quirin", The Nazi Saboteur Case, Andrew Kent

Vanderbilt Law Review

The last decade has seen intense disputes about whether alleged terrorists captured during the nontraditional post- 9/11 conflict with al Qaeda and affiliated groups may use habeas corpus to challenge their military detention or military trials. It is time to take a step back from 9/11 and begin to evaluate the enemy combatant legal regime on a broader, more systemic basis, and to understand its application to future conflicts. A leading precedent ripe for reconsideration is Ex parte Quirin, a World War II-era case in which the Supreme Court held that saboteurs admittedly employed by an enemy nation's military had …

Lawfare And Counterlawfare: The Demonization Of The Gitmo Bar And Other Legal Strategies In The War On Terror, David J. R. Frakt

Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law

No abstract provided.

De-Cloaking Torture: Boumediene And The Military Commissions Act, Alan W. Clarke

San Diego International Law Journal

The Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA) marked the high tide and endgame for hiding torture. It's unraveling did more to uncover the Bush administration's secret interrogation practices than did the political change in Washington. International and domestic backlash against the government's embrace of harsh interrogation techniques, frequently rising to the level of torture, also played a role. However, the Supreme Court's decisions ending in Boumediene v. Bush played the decisive role. Boumediene, and the Supreme Court decisions that led up to it, made inevitable that which politics had left contingent and reversible. It also provided legal and political cover.

Guantanamo Habeas Review: Are The D.C. District Court's Decisions Consistent With Ihl Internment Standards, Laura M. Olson

Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law

No abstract provided.

Guantánamo, Habeas Corpus, And Standards Of Proof: Viewing The Law Through Multiple Lenses, Matthew C. Waxman

Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court held in Boumediene v. Bush that Guantánamo detainees have a constitutional right to habeas corpus review of their detention, but it left to district courts in the first instance responsibility for working through the appropriate standard of proof and related evidentiary principles imposed on the government to justify continued detention. This article argues that embedded in seemingly straightforward judicial standard-setting with respect to proof and evidence are significant policy questions about competing risks and their distribution. How one approaches these questions depends on the lens through which one views the problem: through that of a courtroom concerned …

International Decision: Munaf V. Geren, Harlan G. Cohen

Scholarly Works

This International Decision case comment, the final version of which will be published in Volume 102, No. 4, of the American Journal of International Law (forthcoming), examines the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Munaf v. Geren, a case arising out of U.S. operations in Iraq and allegations of potential torture in Iraqi custody. In that decision, a unanimous Supreme Court held that the federal courts have jurisdiction under the habeas corpus statute to hear claims brought by American citizens held overseas by American forces "operating subject to an American chain of command, even when those forces are acting as a …

Habeas Corpus, Constructive Custody And The Future Of Federal Jurisdiction After Munaf, Karen Shafrir

University of Miami International and Comparative Law Review

In 2004-05, two American Citizens, Shaqir Omar and Mohamed Munaf were separately arrested in Iraq and placed in the Camp Cropper Military Facility, pending adjudication. Both prisoners filed writs of habeas corpus in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The primary issue that the lower courts grappled with was whether or not the courts had jurisdiction to hear the petitions. After various appeals, the United States Supreme Court concluded that the federal courts did have jurisdiction to entertain the habeas petitions but that the petitions would fail on the merits. This paper argues that the standard …

The Accounting: Habeas Corpus And Enemy Combatants, Emily Calhoun

University of Colorado Law Review

The judiciary should impose a heavy burden of justification on the executive when a habeas petitioner challenges the accuracy of facts on which an enemy combatant designation rests. A heavy burden of justification will ensure that the essential institutional purposes of the writ-and legitimate, separated-powers government-are preserved, even during times of national exigency. The institutional purposes of the writ argue for robust judicial review rather than deference to the executive. Moreover, the procedural flexibility traditionally associated with the writ gives the judiciary the tools to ensure that a heavy burden of justification can be imposed.

The Rule Of Law And The Military Commission, Stephen J. Ellmann

Articles & Chapters

This essay examines the underlying foundations of the Supreme Court's decision in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld. After laying out many of the features of the conflicting positions taken by the majority and dissents in the case, the article argues that the majority's judgment was by no means determined by the plain meaning of the statutory provisions at issue, nor even by the Steel Seizure framework of overlapping zones of executive and legislative power. Instead, three factors deserve special emphasis. The first is the Court's effort to protect, and catalyze, Congressional authority. The second is the Court's understanding of its own role …

The Military Commissions Act, Habeas Corpus, And The Geneva Conventions, Curtis A. Bradley

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Brief For Petitioner Salim Ahmed Hamdan, Hamdan V. Rumsfeld, No. 05-184 (U.S. Jan. 6, 2006), Neal K. Katyal

U.S. Supreme Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Military Detention And The Judiciary: Al Qaeda, The Kkk And Supra-State Law, Wayne Mccormack

San Diego International Law Journal

This Article touches on the choice of whether to use the language and tools of war or the language and tools of law enforcement in responding to terrorism. The principal focus, however, is on the limited issue of judicial review and military detentions. The Article reviews the case law created on this subject during the Civil War and World War II. Historical considerations are found by the author to be relevant and helpful in solving the incoherency of current legal responses to terrorism. For instance, indefinite military detention is not coherent with either the international law concept of violations of …

Stacking The Deck Against Suspected Terrorists: The Dwindling Procedural Limits On The Government's Power To Indefinitely Detain United States Citizens As Enemy Combatants, Nickolas A. Kacprowski

Seattle University Law Review

This Note examines Padilla v. Bush as an example of the contemporary application of enemy combatant law. This Note argues that in present and future applications of enemy combatant law, courts should treat Padilla as the preferred model of application because Padilla preserves more Constitutional protections, specifically the right to counsel in bringing a habeas petition, than do Hamdi or Quirin. The Padilla decision is preferable to Hamdi because Padilla restricts the movement of enemy combatant law away from the ex- press criminal protections of the Constitution. In contrast, Hamdi greatly accelerates such movement.

Enemy Combatants, The Courts, And The Constitution, Roberto Iraola

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Sixth Circuit's Unprecedented Reopening Of Demjanjuk V. Petrovsky, Deborah Roy

Cleveland State Law Review

In light of the criticism that the Sixth Circuit has received, this note will examine the authority of the court to reopen the Demjanjuk case in June, 1992.

The Sixth Circuit's Unprecedented Reopening Of Demjanjuk V. Petrovsky, Deborah Roy

Cleveland State Law Review

In light of the criticism that the Sixth Circuit has received, this note will examine the authority of the court to reopen the Demjanjuk case in June, 1992.

Books Received, Journal Staff

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

AIR CHARTER REGULATION

By Jaap Kamp

New York: Praeger Publishers, 1976. Pp. 162. $16.50.

================

ANATOMY OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

By J.G. Merrills

London: Sweet& Maxwell, 1976. Pp. 106. $7.55.

============

AUSTRALIAN LAWYERS AND SOCIAL CHANGE

Edited by David Hambly & John Golding

Sydney: Law Book Company, Ltd., 1976. Pp. 392.$17.50.

================

COLONIAL EMANCIPATION IN THE PACIFIC AND THE CARIBBEAN

By Arnold Leibowitz

New York: Praeger Publishers, 1976. Pp. 221.$20.00.

===============

THE DEVELOPING COMMON MARKET

By John Paxton

Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 1976. 3rd edition. Pp. 240. $25.00.

==============

ERSKINE MAY'S PARLIAMENTARY PRACTICE

Edited by Sir David Lidderdale

London: Butterworths, 1976. …

International Law-Military Tribunals For The Trial Of War Criminals As International Courts, David S. Dewitt S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Petitioner, a German citizen confined in the American Zone of Occupied Germany in the custody of the United States Anny, petitioned the United States District Court, District of Columbia for a writ of habeas corpus. The respondents were the Secretary of Defense and others alleged to have directory control over the jailers in Germany. The petitioner had been convicted of war crimes by Military Tribunal IV at Nuremburg, Germany. This tribunal was established by order of General Clay, United States Military Governor and Zone Commander, pursuant to Control Council Law No. 10 which carried out the London Agreement and the …