Military, War, and Peace Commons^™

Veterans Court: Towards The Implementation Of A Collaborative Justice Model In San Luis Obispo County, Daniel Smee

Continuing Education (CAPSTONE)

Veterans’ treatment courts represent an emerging trend across the country of collaborative justice designed to deal with criminal justice issues stemming from problems linked to military service. This approach places the veteran in VA (Veterans Affairs) treatment programs as a diversion from incarceration. There are few such courts in California (nine) largely in non-rural counties. This study investigated two rural counties, Tulare and Santa Barbara with Veterans courts to develop a model for such a court in San Luis Obispo County. Early recidivism data at the one-year point for Tulare County showed a zero percent rate of criminal behavior (12 …

Military's Approach To Appellate Law, The, Jay L. Thoman

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Samantar V. Yousuf: Recent Developments In The Laws Governing Civil Torture Claims In U.S. Courts, Solomon B. Shinerock

Buffalo Human Rights Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Kiyemba Paradox: Creating A Judicial Framework To Eradicate Indefinite, Unlawful Executive Detentions, Samuel Chow

Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law

The article examines the Supreme Court's evolving role in reviewing detentions related to national security, particularly focusing on the writ of habeas corpus. It argues that while the Court has expanded habeas protections, significant limitations remain, especially in ordering release into the United States. The author contends that for habeas to be meaningful, courts must have the authority to grant "functional release," balancing individual liberty against executive powers. The analysis highlights key cases like Boumediene v. Bush, Munaf v. Geren, and Kiyemba v. Obama, which reveal the challenges in preventing indefinite detentions and the need for clearer …

War Courts: Terror's Distorting Effects On Federal Courts, Collin P. Wedel

Legislation and Policy Brief

In recent years, federal courts have tried an increasing number of suspected terrorists. In fact, since 2001, federal courts have convicted over 403 people for terrorism-related crimes. Although much has been written about the normative question of where terrorists should be tried, scant research exists about the impact these recent trials have had upon the Article III court system. The debate, rather, has focused almost exclusively upon the proper venue for these trials and the hypothetical problems and advantages that might inhere in each venue.

The war in Afghanistan, presenting a host of thorny legal issues, is now the longest …

The Gender Jurisprudence Of The Special Court For Sierra Leone: Progress In The Revolutionary United Front Judgments, Valerie Oosterveld

Law Publications

No abstract provided.

Veterans Benefits In 2010: A New Dialogue Between The Supreme Court And The Federal Circuit, Paul R. Gugliuzza

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Examining The International Judicial Function: International Courts As Dispute Resolvers, Anna Spain

Publications

This article examines the judicial function of international courts by considering both what it is and what it ought to be. The article identifies and describes two distinct functions - dispute settlement and peace promotion - and explores the tensions that exist in pursuing these two aims. It then introduces a third way of understanding the international judicial function that respects international courts’ traditional role as dispute settlers while allowing for their more engaged and proactive function as peacemakers. This third approach conceptualizes that the role of international courts is to resolve disputes. Doing so requires understanding courts as entities …

A Lesson From The Holocaust Restitution Movement For Armenians: Generate Momentum To Secure Restitution, Vartges Saroyan

Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution

This Note proceeds in five parts. Part I provides a historical background of the events prior to and during the Armenian Genocide, and the claims arising out of the Genocide. Part II discusses the status of Genocide restitution and the roadblocks that continue to prevent widespread recovery. Part III explains the timeline of the Holocaust restitution movement and how advocates for restitution were finally able to have some success. Part IV proposes that Genocide-era claims be sought not only by filing lawsuits, but also by creating momentum through negotiation and other principles of ADR. Part V concludes by reiterating the …

Responses To The Ten Questions, Charles J. Dunlap Jr.

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Case For Overseas Article Iii Courts: The Blackwater Effect And Criminal Accountability In The Age Of Privatization, The, Alan F. Williams

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

A series of high-profile cases involving the alleged murders of Iraqi civilians by U.S. contractors operating overseas has highlighted the longstanding problem of how best to address crimes committed overseas by civilian employees, dependents, or contractors of the U.S. government. Among the most notorious of these incidents is the alleged killing of seventeen Iraqi civilians in Nisour Square in Baghdad on September 16, 2007 by employees of Blackwater Worldwide, a private corporation specializing in military operations that has subsequently renamed itself "Xe."2News reports of this incident prompted embarrassment and outrage as many Americans learned that U.S. civilian contractors like the …

Filling The Criminal Liability Gap For Private Military Contractors Abroad: U.S. V. Slough And The Civilian Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act Of 2010, Missye Brickell

Legislation and Policy Brief

To ensure that all contractors who commit crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan can be prosecuted effectively in the United States, Congress must pass legislation to update Federal criminal law and fill the gaps that may leave certain types of contractors free from any criminal liability. The Civilian Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act of 2010 (CEJA) attempts to do just that, and while it may deter some PMCs from participating in the U.S. military and security contracting market, the benefits of having a fully accountable U.S. legal system outweigh the drawbacks for individual contracting companies.

“Bring[Ing] Our Enemies To Justice”: Terrorism And The Court, Anna Elazan

Legislation and Policy Brief

This article focuses on the venue of Mohammad’s trial and is broken into three sections. The first section reviews the historical use of military tribunals. This section begins by looking at the basis for Presidential authority to authorize the use of military commissions. This section then outlines the first use of military commissions since World War II. President George W. Bush’s authorization parallels the provisions in President Franklin Roosevelt’s authorization of the use of commissions in the 1940s. However, following authorization, the military commissions were subject to judicial challenges and significant revision by Congress. Finally, this section tracks recent developments …

The Impact Of Civilian Aggravating Factors On The Military Death Penalty (1984-2005): Another Chapter In The Resistance Of The Armed Forces To The Civilianization Of Military Justice, Catherine M. Grosso, David C. Baldus, George Woodworth

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

In 1984, the U.S. Armed Forces amended its capital punishment system for death eligible murder to bring it into compliance with Furman v. Georgia. Those amendments were modeled after death penalty legislation prevailing in over thirty states. After a brief period between 1986 and 1990, the charging decisions of commanders and the conviction and sentencing decisions of court martial members (jurors) transformed the military death penalty system into a dual system that treats two classes of death eligible murder quite differently. Since 1990, a member of the armed forces accused of a killing a commissioned officer or murder with a …

Terrorism And The Law: Show Trials And Why The Show Must Go On, Ibpp Editor

International Bulletin of Political Psychology

The author discusses the nature and meaning of terrorism trials during the United States’ war on terror.

The International Criminal Court Does Not Have Complete Jurisdiction Over Customary Crimes Against Humanity And War Crimes, 43 J. Marshall L. Rev. 603 (2010), Jordan J. Paust

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The International Criminal Court And Proximity To The Scene Of The Crime: Does The Rome Statute Permit All Of The Icc's Trials To Take Place At Local Or Regional Chambers?, 43 J. Marshall L. Rev. 715 (2010), Stuart K. Ford

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Nuremberg Tribunal V. The Tokyo Tribunal: Designs, Staffs, And Operations, 43 J. Marshall L. Rev. 753 (2010), Zachary D. Kaufman

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

“Runaway Train”: Controlling Crimes Committed By Private Contractors Through Application Of The Uniform Code Of Military Justice, Matthew Dahl

Barry Law Review

This paper will argue that, in the absence of effective alternatives, the new law granting court-martial jurisdiction over civilians is a necessary step in effectively controlling crimes by private contractors and other civilians accompanying U.S. armed forces overseas if other measures are not effectuated. Part II will look at two important Supreme Court decisions that currently restrict the military’s ability to court-martial civilians, and it will also highlight the government’s attempts over the past 50 years to come up with a solution to the problem. Part III will examine three alternatives to the amendment to Article 2(a)(10) that could make …

From The Chair, Lela P. Love

Articles

No abstract provided.

The Lexington Principles On The Rights Of Detainees: A Transnational Legal Process Approach To Due Process, David Alan Jordan, Frederic L. Kirgis, R. Brooke Lewis, Thomas Greenwood, Bennett L. Ross, Kathryn M. Zunich

Scholarly Articles

In Boumediene v. Bush, decided June 12, 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court extended the constitutional privilege of habeas corpus to noncitizens detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Courts will now be called upon to assess the propriety of American detainee treatment practices against unclear constitutional standards. The strength and contours of the due process protections the U.S. Constitution will afford these detainees is still an unsettled question. The Lexington Principles are designed to help guide the development of American due process standards as they move outside our borders. These Principles are also intended to serve as a model for those …

Terrorist Detention: Directions For Reform, Benjamin J. Priester

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Extraordinary Rendition: A Wrong Without A Right, Robert Johnson

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Applying Geneva Convention Principles To Guantánamo Bay, Kyndra Rotunda

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Critical Guide To The Iraqi High Tribunal's Anfal Judgement: Genocide Against The Kurds, Jennifer Trahan

Michigan Journal of International Law

In the Anfal trial, the Iraqi High Tribunal (IHT or the Tribunal) in Baghdad convicted former Iraqi high officials of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. Unlike its predecessor-the Dujail trial-the Anfal trial included the presentation of a high volume of documentary and eye-witness evidence. This evidence clearly revealed the existence of a genocidal campaign by the former Iraqi government and military that eliminated an estimated 182,000 Iraqi Kurds in 1988, as part of the eight-phased "Anfal campaign" (the Anfal). Relying on this and other evidence, judges in the Anfal Trial Chamber explained fairly persuasively how genocide, crimes against …

Commentary: International Prosecution Of Heads Of State For Genocide, War Crimes, And Crimes Against Humanity, 43 J. Marshall L. Rev. Xxv (2009), Hans Corell

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

National Security Courts: Star Chamber Or Specialized Justice?, Mark R. Shulman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

In October 2008, the author moderated a panel discussion addressing the utility of establishing a new national security court system for administering the detention and trial of terrorist suspects. The discussion featured comments by five lawyers with significant academic and practical experience in the field: Richard Zabel, a litigation partner at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, a former Assistant U.S. Attorney and co-author of In Pursuit of Justice: Prosecuting Terrorism Cases in the Federal Courts; Glenn L. Sulmasy, an Associate Professor of Law at the United States Coast Guard Academy and author of the forthcoming book, The National …

On Jurisdictional Elephants And Kangaroo Courts, Stephen I. Vladeck

NULR Online

No abstract provided.

Punishing Aggressors In U.S. Courts: Will The Act Of State Doctrine Bar National Prosecution Of The Crime Of Aggression?, Gergana Halpern

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

The note examines the intersection of the Act of State Doctrine and the prosecution of the crime of aggression in U.S. courts, arguing that while the doctrine does not legally preclude such prosecutions, practical considerations such as political sensitivity and the need for international legitimacy suggest that U.S. courts should await international consensus before proceeding. The analysis highlights the complexities of balancing legal principles with diplomatic realities.

War Tales And War Trials, Patricia M. Wald

Michigan Law Review

In this foreword, I will compare my experiences as a judge on the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, and the work of war crimes tribunals generally, with a few of the recurrent themes in epic tales of war. Books and trials strive to educate and to persuade their audiences of the barbarity of war and its antipathy to the most fundamental norms of a humane society.3 War crimes tribunals began with Nuremberg and have proliferated in the past fifteen years. These tribunals were established to try and to punish individuals for violations of international humanitarian law ("IHL")-the so-called …