Law Commons^™

Cyber Warfare And Precautions Against The Effects Of Attacks, Eric Talbot Jensen

Faculty Scholarship

Ninety-eight percent of all U.S. government communications travel over civilian-owned-and-operated networks. Additionally, the government relies almost completely on civilian providers for computer software and hardware products, services, and maintenance. This near-complete intermixing of civilian and military computer infrastructure makes many of those civilian objects and providers legitimate targets under the law of armed conflict. Other civilian networks, services, and communications may suffer collateral damage from legitimate attacks on government targets. To protect those civilian objects and providers from the effects of attacks, the law of armed conflict requires a state to segregate its military assets from the civilian population and …

Preventive War, Deterrent Retaliation, And Retrospective Disproportionality, Brian Lee

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

An Overt Turn On Covert Action, Afsheen John Radsan

Faculty Scholarship

Long past the soul-searching of Watergate, very few people question the need for covert action as a part of American foreign policy. The world is so dangerous after 9/11 that it would be irresponsible to suggest that our intelligence agencies should be disbanded or that our government should acknowledge everything it does on the dark side. Today the question is not whether we should engage in covert action at all, but how often and under what circumstances.

Not everything stays secret. Our Nation has been conducting covert action with greater transparency and more congressional participation than during the Cold War. …

Due Process And Targeted Killing Of Terrorists, Richard Murphy, Afsheen John Radsan

Faculty Scholarship

"Targeted killing" is extra-judicial, premeditated killing by a state of a specifically identified person not in its custody. States have used this tool, secretly or not, throughout history. In recent years, targeted killing has generated new controversy as two states in particular-Israel and the United States-have struggled against opponents embedded in civilian populations. As a matter of express policy, Israel engages in targeted killing of persons it deems members of terrorist organizations involved in attacks on Israel. The United States, less expressly, has adopted a similar policy against al Qaeda-particularly in the border areas of Afghanistan and Pakistan, where the …

Heller, Citizenship, And The Right To Serve In The Military, Elizabeth L. Hillman

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Ethical Dimensions Of National Security Law, Charles J. Dunlap Jr.

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Towards A Cyberspace Legal Regime In The Twenty-First Century: Considerations For American Cyber-Warriors, Charles J. Dunlap Jr.

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

After Guantanamo: War, Crime, And Detention, Madeline Morris, Frances A. Eberhard, Michael A. Watsula

Faculty Scholarship

Neither the law of war nor the criminal law, alone or in combination, provides an adequate legal structure for responding to the most serious threats posed by Al Qaeda and similar groups. After identifying the limits of the criminal law and the law of war for these purposes, this article outlines a comprehensive proposal for counterterrorism prosecution and detention policy. Appended to the article is the draft Counterterrorism Detention, Treatment and Release Act. The legislation proposed: 1) defines the category of persons to be subject to detention; 2) delineates procedures for identifying individuals falling within that category; 3) provides a …

The United States, Israel, And Unlawful Combatants, Curtis A. Bradley

Faculty Scholarship

This essay considers how members of a terrorist organization should be categorized under international law when the organization is engaged in an armed conflict with a nation. The proper categorization can have significant implications for the nation’s authority under both international and domestic law to subject members of a terrorist organization to military targeting and detention. As a result of judicial decisions, Israel ostensibly follows a two category approach, pursuant to which anyone who is not a lawful combatant, including a member of a terrorist organization, is a civilian. The United States, by contrast, currently follows a three category approach, …

Roles, Missions,And Equipment: Military Lessons From Experience In This Decade, Charles J. Dunlap Jr.

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Prosecuting Alleged Terrorists By Military Commission: A Prudent Option, Scott L. Silliman

Faculty Scholarship

President Obama has announced that the detention facility at Guantánamo Bay will be closed by January 22, 2010. He has also said that at least some of the detainees facing criminal prosecution will be tried in military commissions. The system of military commissions established by President Bush after the 9/11 attacks, as well as the one which Congress enacted in 2006 following the Supreme Court’s Hamdan decision, were widely criticized as being unproductive and not meeting international legal standards. The Congress has, very recently, revised the rules and procedures for military commissions to make them fair, effective and much more …

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 …

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 …

Is Justice Relevant To The Law Of War, George P. Fletcher

Faculty Scholarship

Intellectual work on the law of war suffers from chronic isolation. The commentators on the Rome Statute are international lawyers who pay no attention to the work either of theoretical criminal lawyers or of the philosophers. The philosophers – Jeff McMahan as an outstanding example – ignore the legal details that dominate the books of the international lawyers. Criminal lawyers have much to contribute to the discussion of international law, but they seem not to be interested. Writers with limited audiences, living in closed worlds, are unaware of what they have to learn from those with a different take on …

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

Faculty Scholarship

In reflecting on the arc of US and coalition detention operations in Afghanistan, three key issues related to the law of armed conflict 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 …