Military, War, and Peace Commons^™

Standing And Covert Surveillance, Christopher Slobogin

Pepperdine Law Review

This Article describes and analyzes standing doctrine as it applies to covert government surveillance, focusing on practices thought to be conducted by the National Security Agency. Primarily because of its desire to avoid judicial incursions into the political process, the Supreme Court has construed its standing doctrine in a way that makes challenges to covert surveillance very difficult. Properly understood, however, such challenges do not call for judicial trenching on the power of the legislative and executive branches. Instead, they ask the courts to ensure that the political branches function properly. This political process theory of standing can rejuvenate the …

The Admissibility Of Confessions Compelled By Foreign Coercion: A Compelling Question Of Values In An Era Of Increasing International Criminal Cooperation, Geoffrey S. Corn, Kevin Cieply

Pepperdine Law Review

This Article proceeds on a simple and clear premise: a confession extracted by torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment should never be admitted into evidence in a U.S. criminal trial. Whether accomplished through extending the Due Process or Self-Incrimination based exclusionary rules to foreign official coercion, or by legislative action, such exclusion is necessary to align evidentiary practice regarding confessions procured by foreign agents with our nation's fundamental values as reflected in the Fifth Amendment and our ratification of the CAT. This outcome is not incompatible with Connelly. Rather, this Article explores the limits of the Court's language in …

The Suez Crisis Of 1956 And Its Aftermath: A Comparative Study Of Constitutions, Use Of Force, Diplomacy And International Relations, Pnina Lahav

Faculty Scholarship

This article compares and juxtaposes constitutional war powers (deployed by the belligerents) and diplomacy (deployed by the US) as means of pursuing foreign policy during the 1956 Suez crisis.

In the fall of 1956 the United Kingdom, France and Israel launched a war against Egypt. It soon became clear that this was a coordinated effort. The war started a few days before the US presidential elections but the parties did not share their plans with President Eisenhower. The Hungarian rebellion and the Soviet invasion of Hungary occurred at the same time. Within weeks, the United States, in cooperation with the …

The Sweeping Domestic War Powers Of Congress, Saikrishna Bangalore Prakash

Michigan Law Review

With the Habeas Clause standing as a curious exception, the Constitution seems mysteriously mute regarding federal authority during invasions and rebellions. In truth, the Constitution speaks volumes about these domestic wars. The inability to perceive the contours of the domestic wartime Constitution stems, in part, from unfamiliarity with the multifarious emergency legislation enacted during the Revolutionary War. During that war, state and national legislatures authorized the seizure of property, military trial of civilians, and temporary dictatorships. Ratified against the backdrop of these fairly recent wartime measures, the Constitution, via the Necessary and Proper Clause and other provisions, rather clearly augmented …

Guaranteeing Republics To The Confederate States: A Guarantee Clause Justification For Lincoln’S Response To Civil War, Michael Morea

Pepperdine Law Review

There has been substantial debate over the constitutionality of Lincoln’s response to secession and his role as executive during the Civil War. While many historians and legal experts accept the theory that Lincoln, as president, was vested by Article II with power to act decisively in suppressing secession in an effort to preserve the Union, there is branch of libertarian thought that remains unconvinced that his tactics were constitutional. For example, three-time presidential candidate Ron Paul, in an interview with “Meet the Press,” stated that Lincoln should not have gone to war, arguing that Lincoln’s actions were motivated by the …

The Ndaa, Aumf, And Citizens Detained Away From The Theater Of War: Sounding A Clarion Call For A Clear Statement Rule, Diana Cho

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

In the armed conflict resulting from the September 11 attacks, the executive authority to order the indefinite detention of citizens captured away from the theater of war is an issue of foreign and domestic significance. The relevant law of armed conflict provisions relevant to conflicts that are international or non-international in nature, however, do not fully address this issue. Congress also intentionally left the question of administrative orders of citizen detainment unresolved in a controversial provision of the 2012 version of the annually-enacted National Defense Authorization Act. While plaintiffs in Hedges v. Obama sought to challenge the enforceability of NDAA’s …

Book Review: Nuclear Weapons And Law. Ed. Arthur Selwyn Miller And Martin Feinrider. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1984., Dorinda G. Dallmeyer

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Unfinished Business Of Repealing “Don’T Ask, Don’T Tell”: The Military’S Unconstitutional Ban On Transgender Individuals, Kayla Quam

Utah Law Review

Discrimination based on gender identity is a form of sex discrimination. In Price Waterhouse, the Supreme Court clarified that “sex” encompasses more than biological genitalia. That ruling eviscerated the holding of Holloway, Sommers, and Ulane—the three cases the Tenth Circuit relied on in declaring that sex discrimination did not encompass gender nonconformity. At least since Price Waterhouse, discrimination against someone because of that individual’s failure to conform to sex stereotypes must be considered a form of sex discrimination.156 As transgenderism is defined as nonconformity “to that typically associated with the sex . . . assigned at birth,” discrimination based on …

Liberty, Security, And Judicial Review In The War On Terror: An Analysis Of Supreme Court Approaches To Deference In A Post-9/11 Context, Jacob Oppler

Senior Independent Study Theses

In times of war, the government acts to suppress threats to national security, often curtailing or restricting American civil liberties. Over the course of American history, the Supreme Court has reviewed this legal conflict between civil liberties and national security policies during war. Scholars generally observe the Court’s judicial review as deferential to the government. The War on Terror presents new and different challenges to American civil liberties. While this legal conflict has emerged again under the conditions of a war against terrorism, the war itself is markedly unlike past wars in American history. This research seeks to explain how …

State Labs Of Federalism And Law Enforcement 'Drone' Use, Chris Jenks

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

This article reviews and assesses current state legislation regulating law enforcement use of unmanned aerial systems (UAS). The legislation runs the gamut of permissive to restrictive and even utilizes different terms for the same object of regulation, UAS. These laws are the confused and at times even contradictory extension of societal views about UAS. The article reviews the U.S. Supreme Court’s manned aircraft trilogy of cases, California v. Ciraolo, Florida v. Riley, and Dow Chemical v. U.S. and two significant technology based decisions, Kyllo v. U.S. and U.S. v. Jones, and applies them to current state efforts to regulate law …

Defining And Punishing Offenses Under Treaties, Sarah H. Cleveland, William S. Dodge

Faculty Scholarship

One of the principal aims of the U.S. Constitution was to give the federal government authority to comply with its international legal commitments. The scope of Congress's constitutional authority to implement treaties has recently received particular attention. In Bond v. United States, the Court avoided the constitutional questions by construing a statute to respect federalism, but these questions are unlikely to go away. This Article contributes to the ongoing debate by identifying the Offenses Clause as an additional source of Congress's constitutional authority to implement certain treaty commitments. Past scholarship has assumed that the Article I power to "define …

A Tradition At War With Itself: A Reply To Professor Rana's Review Of America's Forgotten Constitutions: Defiant Visions Of Power And Community, Robert Tsai

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

This essay responds to Professor Aziz Rana's review essay, "The Many American Constitutions," 93 Texas Law Review 1193 (2015).

He contends: (1) my portrayal of American constitutionalism might contain a “hidden” teleological understanding of the development of constitutional law; (2) my notion of "conventional sovereignty" sometimes seems content-free and at other times "interlinked with liberal egalitarianism"; and (3) a focus on failed constitutions "inadvertently tends to compartmentalize the overall tradition."

I answer in the following ways: (1) I reject any sense that constitutional law has moved in an arc of steady progress toward Enlightenment and instead embrace a tradition of …

The Advisory Opinion On The Legality Of The Threat Or Use Of Nuclear Weapons, Stefaan Smis, Kim Van Der Borght

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Vladimir Putin And The Rule Of Law In Russia, Jeffrey Kahn

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Who's Checking?: Taking A Look At Recently Enacted Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Laws In The United States And Zimbabwe And Their Impact On The Separation Of Powers, Andrew M. O'Connell

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Al Bahlul And Article Iii: A Reply To Marty And Steve, Peter Margulies, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

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

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Letter To Editor Indiana Magazine Of History, Bert Chapman

Libraries Faculty and Staff Scholarship and Research

Letter responding to comparison of Guantanamo bay terrorist detainees with the noted Indiana Civil War case of Lambdin Milligan, ultimately decided by the U.S. Supreme Court, who was detained by Union military authorities during the Civil War for his pro-confederate activities and tried by a military court.

Ending Perpetual War? Constitutional War Termination Powers And The Conflict Against Al Qaeda, David A. Simon

Pepperdine Law Review

This Article presents a framework for interpreting the constitutional war termination powers of Congress and the President and applies this framework to questions involving how and when the war against Al Qaeda and associated forces could end. Although constitutional theory and practice suggest the validity of congressional actions to initiate war, the issue of Congress’s constitutional role in ending war has received little attention in scholarly debates. Theoretically, this Article contends that terminating war without meaningful cooperation between the President and Congress generates tension with the principle of the separation of powers underpinning the U.S. constitutional system, with the Framers’ …

Targeted Killing: United States Policy, Constitional Law, And Due Process, Mark Febrizio

Senior Honors Theses

The increased incorporation of targeted killing, primarily through the use of unmanned aerial vehicles, into United States policy raises salient questions regarding its consistency with the U.S. Constitution. This paper contrasts interpretations of constitutional due process with the current legal framework for conducting targeted killing operations. The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution establishes the due process owed to U.S. citizens. This paper determines that the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki, an American citizen, was accomplished in a manner inconsistent with constitutional due process and demonstrates an over-extension of executive branch power. This paper examines one scholarly recommendation that seeks to increase …

In Sight, It Must Be Right: Judicial Review Of Va Decisions For Reasons And Bases Vs. Clear Error, David E. Boelzner

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Picking Up Where Katcoff Left Off: Developing A Framework For A Constitutional Military Chaplaincy, Malcolm H. Wilkerson

Oklahoma Law Review

Under existing precedent, portions of the military chaplaincy program are unconstitutional. Although presenting at least the appearance of the “establishment” of religion, the military chaplaincy program has never been successfully challenged on constitutional grounds—despite its history of more than two centuries. The only court that has directly confronted the issue upheld the military chaplaincy based on what appears to be a counter-intuitive application of the Free Exercise Clause. Namely, the military chaplaincy program ensures the free exercise rights of service members who, because of their military service, would otherwise be deprived of access to religious services. And indeed, when a …

The Trickle-Down War, Rosa Brooks

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The history of the European nation-state, wrote political sociologist Charles Tilly, is inextricably bound up with the history of warfare. To oversimplify Tilly’s nuanced and complex arguments, the story goes something like this: As power-holders (originally bandits and local strongmen) sought to expand their power, they needed capital to pay for weapons, soldiers and supplies. The need for capital and new recruits drove the creation of taxation systems and census mechanisms, and the need for more effective systems of taxation and recruitment necessitated better roads, better communications and better record keeping. This in turn enabled the creation of larger and …

The Voice Of Reason—Why Recent Judicial Interpretations Of The Antiterrorism And Effective Death Penalty Act’S Restrictions On Habeas Corpus Are Wrong, Judith L. Ritter

Seattle University Law Review

By filing a petition for a federal writ of habeas corpus, a prisoner initiates a legal proceeding collateral to the direct appeals process. Federal statutes set forth the procedure and parameters of habeas corpus review. The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) first signed into law by President Clinton in 1996, included significant cut-backs in the availability of federal writs of habeas corpus. This was by congressional design. Yet, despite the dire predictions, for most of the first decade of AEDPA’s reign, the door to habeas relief remained open. More recently, however, the Supreme Court reinterpreted a key portion …

New York Times V. U.S.: Implications And Relevance In The 21st Century, Maria E. Lombardi

Student Publications

In 1971, the New York Times released the first installment in a series later referred to as the Pentagon Papers that would eventually have significant political, social, and historical impacts that are felt even in the 21st Century. Following the first release, President Nixon’s administration sought an injunction against the publication of the remaining contents of the classified study, ultimately becoming an extensive legal process that culminated in the Supreme Court. In a per curiam opinion, the Court ruled that in accordance with Organization for a Better Austin v. Keefe and Near v. Minnesota that the federal government did not …

A Response To Steve Vladeck And Kevin Jon Heller, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Legal Affairs: Dreyfus, Guantánamo, And The Foundation Of The Rule Of Law, David Cole

Touro Law Review

Analogous to the Dreyfus affair, America's reaction to the events of September 11, 2001, subverted the rule of law to impose penalties on those it viewed as a threat. There are lessons to be learned from both the Dreyfus affair and America's reaction to September 11, 2001.

The Constitutional And Counterterrorism Implications Of Targeted Killing : Hearing Before The S. Judiciary Subcomm. On The Constitution, Civil Rights, And Human Rights, 113th Cong., April 23, 2013 (Statement By Professor Rosa Brooks, Geo. U. L. Center), Rosa Brooks

Testimony Before Congress

Mr. Chairman, the mere mention of drones tends to arouse strong emotional reactions on both sides of the political spectrum, and last week's tragic events in Boston have raised the temperature still further. Some demonize drones, denouncing them for causing civilian deaths or enabling long-distance, "video game-like" killing, even as they ignore the fact that the same (or worse) could equally be said of many other weapons delivery systems. Others glorify drones, viewing them as a low- or no-cost way to "take out terrorists" wherever they may be found, with little regard for broader questions of strategy or the rule …

Due Process; A Detached Judge; And Enemy Combatants, Julian Mann Iii

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

In the landmark administrative law decision of Goldberg v. Kelly, Justice Brennan stated that an “impartial decision maker is essential” to procedural due process. As a corollary, in the more recent decision of Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, Justice O'Connor stated that “due process requires a neutral and a detached judge in the first instance.” Thus, the due process clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution require that the essential element of neutrality remain an integral part of any administrative hearing. There can be no departure from this fundamental guarantee of constitutional due process for the administrative hearings …

Rostker V. Goldberg: A Step Backward In Equal Protection, Or A Justifiable Affirmation Of Congressional Power?, Gilbert L. Purcell, Janet Rappaport

Pepperdine Law Review

The Supreme Court in Rostker v. Goldberg upheld a Congressional decision which excluded women from registration for service in the Armed Forces of the United States. Although the case was brought based upon equal protection grounds, the majority took a separation of powers stance and based its decision upon the fact that the Court has traditionally granted deference to the decisions of Congress in the area of military affairs. The minority opinions disagreed with the majority's analysis and claimed that the central issue in Rostker was not military in nature, but was that Congress' plan to register males only, promoted …