Law Commons^™

Unrwa And Palestine Refugees, Susan M. Akram

Faculty Scholarship

This chapter studies the relationship between Palestinian refugees and the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA). UNRWA’s role is to provide humanitarian ‘relief’ and to provide economic opportunities—‘works’—for refugees in the areas of major displacement: the West Bank, Gaza, Syria, Jordan, and Lebanon. Initially, the definition of Palestine refugee for UNRWA’s purposes was a sub-category of the United Nations Conciliation Commission on Palestine definition for purposes of relief provision, but it also included other categories of persons displaced from later conflicts. Following the passage of the Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness, the …

Strengthening The U.S.-Japan Alliance: Pathways For Bridging Law And Policy, Columbia Law School, 2020, Nobuhisa Ishizuka, Masahiro Kurosaki, Matthew C. Waxman

Faculty Scholarship

During the three years leading up to this year ’s 60th anniversary of the signing of the 1960 U.S.-Japan Security Treaty, a series of workshops were held under the joint sponsorship of Columbia Law School’s Center for Japanese Legal Studies and the National Defense Academy of Japan’s Center for Global Security. Bringing together experts in international law and political science primarily from the United States and Japan, the workshops examined how differing approaches to use of force and understandings of individual and collective self-defense in the two countries might adversely affect their alliance.

The workshop participants explored the underlying causes …

Brief Amici Curiae On Behalf Of International And Constitutional Law Experts In Support Of Petition For Certiorari, Al Bahlul V. United States , 840 F.3d 757 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (En Banc), Robert D. Sloane, Foley Hoag Llp

Faculty Scholarship

Amici curiae, legal experts in international and constitutional law, believe that a majority of the en banc panel in Bahlul v. United States, 840 F.3d 757 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (en banc), mistakenly affirmed Ali Hamza Ahmad Suliman al Bahlul’s conviction by a military commission for a non-international war crime. The main concurring opinion in that case misconceived how international law defines the jurisdiction of law-of-war military commissions. As amici argue below, it is the Constitution—not international law—that limits the jurisdiction of lawof-war military commissions.

Obama's Aumf Legacy, Curtis A. Bradley, Jack Landman Goldsmith

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Presidential War Powers As A Two-Level Dynamic: International Law, Domestic Law, And Practice-Based Legal Change, Curtis A. Bradley, Jean Galbraith

Faculty Scholarship

There is a rich literature on the circumstances under which the United Nations Charter or specific Security Council resolutions authorize nations to use force abroad, and there is a rich literature on the circumstances under which the U.S. Constitution and statutory law allows the President to use force abroad. These are largely separate areas of scholarship, addressing what are generally perceived to be two distinct levels of legal doctrine. This Article, by contrast, considers these two levels of doctrine together as they relate to the United States. In doing so, it makes three main contributions. First, it demonstrates striking parallels …

Ethical Issues Of The Practice Of National Security Law: Some Observations, Charles J. Dunlap

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Inter Arma Enim Non Silent Leges, Philip C. Bobbitt

Faculty Scholarship

There is good reason to think that law and war have nothing to do with one another, and this has certainly been so for most of the lifetime of mankind. Cicero's famous observation-silent enim leges inter arma – from which I take my title, was not a novel insight when uttered in 52 B.C. and in any case was not said in the context of war, but of a prosecution for murder in the aftermath of the Roman riots of that era between the partisans of the populares and optimates. Clausewitz, however, said much the same thing when he decried …

United States Detention Operations In Afghanistan And The Law Of Armed Conflict, Matthew C. Waxman

Faculty Scholarship

Looking back on US and coalition detention operations in Afghanistan to date, three key issues stand out: one substantive, one procedural and one policy. The substantive matter – what are the minimum baseline treatment standards required as a matter of international law? – has clarified significantly during the course of operations there, largely as a result of the US Supreme Court’s holding in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld. The procedural matter – what adjudicative processes does international law require for determining who may be detained? – eludes consensus and has become more controversial the longer the Afghan conflict continues. And the …

Silence Of The Laws? Conceptions Of International Relations And International Law In Hobbes, Kant, And Locke, Michael W. Doyle, Geoffrey S. Carlson

Faculty Scholarship

This Essay explains how the political theorists Hobbes, Kant, and Locke interpret the decision to go to war (us ad bellum) and the manner in which the war is conducted (just in bello). It also considers the implications of the three theories for compliance with international law more generally. It concludes that although all three can lay claim to certain key features of modern international law, it is Locke who provides the most complete support for both the laws of war, in particular, and with international law, in general.

The Status Of Detainees From The Iraq And Afghanistan Conflicts, Srividhya Ragavan, Michael S. Mireles

Faculty Scholarship

The paper is premised on the idea that the future course of international law will be impacted by the United States' ability to adhere to international treaties to which it is a signatory. Hence, the current administration bears a responsibility to avoid unwisely stretching, distorting, or avoiding the principles of international law for short-term gain in a manner that jeopardizes long-term sustainable policy. The United States should be wary of creating a dangerous precedent - not only for the world, but for itself. If the United States shirks from or misinterprets international legal principles, it leaves the forum open for …

The Interface Of National Constitutional Systems With International Law And Institutions On Using Military Force: Changing Trends In Executive And Legislative Powers, Lori Fisler Damrosch

Faculty Scholarship

The perplexities of the twenty-first century over national decision-making in support of international security are an outgrowth of centuries-long trends concerning subordination of military power to constitutional control. Civilian control over the military has been inextricably connected with the strengthening of domestic constitutionalism and safeguards for citizens' liberties in many different democracies.

Along with the establishment of constitutional structures for regulating national military power, national constitutions have contributed to the evolution of contemporary international law prohibiting the use or threat of force in international relations. Milestones along this path begin with the French Constitution of 1791 – the first national …

Sanctions Against Perpetrators Of Terrorism, Lori Fisler Damrosch

Faculty Scholarship

Since the title for this panel is "Presidential Uses of Force and Other Sanction Strategies," I will begin with "other sanction strategies" – that is, other than use of force. I would rather not be cast in the role of the dove on the panel to comment on illegitimacy of uses of force (presidential or otherwise), because I do not want to rule out or necessarily oppose presidential uses of force for counter-terrorism purposes in all circumstances. Indeed, I find myself in considerable agreement with Professor Reisman's lecture. Although I have disagreed with some of his writings and positions on …

Banning The Bomb: Law And Its Limits, Lori Fisler Damrosch

Faculty Scholarship

We can all agree with the contributors to this volume that nuclear weapons present the threat of unimaginable devastation that could bring an end to civilization and even to life on this planet. The grim calculations and stark images come back again and again, but they cannot be repeated too often: over 50,000 weapons in the United States and Soviet arsenals, each with a destructive force dwarfing the explosions at Hiroshima and Nagasaki; radiation effects producing indescribable suffering and death; environmental damage that defies quantification or prediction; the specter of nuclear winter rendering the earth uninhabitable. No rational being can …