President/Executive Department Commons^™

Some Structural Dilemmas Of World Organization, C. Wilfred Jenks

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Foreign Policy And The Government Legal Adviser, Henry Darwin

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Foreign Policy And The Government Legal Adviser, Stephen M. Schwebel

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The Cyber-Industrial Complex, Connor O’Malley

Political Science Theses and Capstones

When Edward Snowden released a massive trove of classified files from the National Security Agency, the world became aware of numerous global surveillance systems. As Snowden hoped, a global dialogue began concerning surveillance, privacy, and government transparency. While there was a lively discourse surrounding the leak and Snowden, another story was missed. Snowden was not an employee of the NSA; rather he was an employee of Booz Allen Hamilton, a private contractor maintaining computer systems for the NSA. The deeper story here is the emerging relationship between government agencies and technology companies. This paper discusses the theory of iron triangles …

A Response To Professor Rascoff's Presidential Intelligence, Philip C. Bobbitt

Faculty Scholarship

Professor Samuel Rascoff’s Presidential Intelligence reflects both the conceptual and research strengths of the author, which are formidable, and the practical difficulties of intelligence reform, which are no less so. Rascoff is certainly right that to be effective – in the still-unfolding constitutional environment that must contend with terror groups armed with unprecedented weapons and communications technology – the intelligence community (IC) must act within the law and the rules governing that community must be reformed to make this possible. He is inclined to believe that the answer lies in heightened presidential management. I’m not so sure. The actual presidential …

Congressional And Presidential War Powers As A Dialogue: Analysis Of The Syrian And Isis Conflicts, Charles Tiefer, Kathleen Clark

All Faculty Scholarship

Much of the scholarship on war powers looks back on whether U.S. military interventions were authorized, examining the President's powers under Article II of the Constitution, and congressional enactments. That legal question is important, but it does not capture the interactive nature of the dynamic between Congress and the President. This Article instead focuses on the process of dialogue between Congress and the President prior to the exercise of war powers. We examine in detail how that dialogue operates in two recent episodes: the U.S. response to Syrian President Assad's use of chemical weapons in 2013, and the rise of …

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

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Arms Control: Salt Ii- Executive Agreement Or Treaty?, Keith E. Fryer, J. Michael Levengood

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Aumf Panel Transcript, Rosa Brooks, Benjamin Wittes

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Lost In Translation? The Relevancy Of Kobe Bryant And Aristotle To The Legality Of Modern Warfare, Rachel E. Vanlandingham

Pepperdine Law Review

What do Kobe Bryant, Aristotle, and the continuing U.S. response to the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, have in common? President Barack Obama told the New Yorker in early 2014, in response to a question regarding the seeming resurgence of al Qaeda in Syria and Iraq, that “[t]he analogy we use around here sometimes, and I think is accurate, is if a jayvee team puts on Lakers uniforms that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant.” As this example demonstrates, the Obama Administration and others, in reference to the legality of the use of armed force against al Qaeda and similar …

Lawyering Wars: Failing Leadership, Risk Aversion, And Lawyer Creep—Should We Expect More Lone Survivors?, Arthur Rizer

Indiana Law Journal

“We are a nation of laws, not men.” This motto—made famous by the Supreme Court case Marbury v. Madison1—has existed since the founding of the United States. This maxim embodies the sentiment that, in order to prevent tyranny, citizens should be governed by fixed law rather than the whims of a dictator. In his decision, Chief Justice John Marshall did not qualify his remarks by saying, “we are a nation of laws, except in time of war.” Indeed with the modern U.S. military, Cicero’s observation that “[l]aws are inoperative in war” has never been further from the truth. Never before …

Contemporary Practice Of The United States Relating To International Law, July 2015, Kristina Daugirdas, Julian Davis Mortenson

Articles

In this section: • United States Adjusts Aid to Egypt in Light of Legal and Political Developments • P51 and Iran Reach Agreement on Iranian Nuclear Program; Obama Administration Seeks Congressional Approval • United States Authorizes New Sanctions Program Aimed at Foreign Perpetrators ofCyberattacks and Cyberexploits • Normalization of Cuba-U.S. Relations Continues • U.S. Navy Continues Freedom of Navigation and Overflight Missions in the South China Sea Despite China’s “Island-Building” Campaign • U.S. Department of Justice Charges Leaders of FIFA, Affiliate Soccer Organizations, and Sports Marketing Companies in 47-Count Indictment

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 Boundless War: Challenging The Notion Of A Global Armed Conflict Against Al-Qaeda And Its Affiliates, Andrew Beshai

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

The U.S. military response to the 9/11 attacks has expanded into a “global war” without a definite geographic scope. Both the Bush and Obama administrations have executed attacks in several countries including Somalia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Yemen under the “global war” paradigm. This Article challenges the concept of a global armed conflict, instead favoring the “epicenter-of-hostilities” framework for determining the legality of military action against Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and other terrorist groups. This approach, rooted in established international law, measures the existence of specific criteria in each nation where hostile forces are present to determine if an armed conflict in …

Repatriate . . . Then Compensate: Why The United States Owes Reparation Payments To Former Guantánamo Detainees, Cameron Bell

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

In late 2001, U.S. government officials chose Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, as the site to house the “war on terror” detainees. Since then, 779 individuals have been detained at Guantánamo. Many of the detainees have endured years of detention, cruel and degrading treatment, and for some, torture—conduct that violates well-established prohibitions against torture and inhumane treatment under both general international law and the law of war. Under these bodies of law, the United States is required to make reparation—through restitution, compensation, and satisfaction—for acts that violate its international obligations. But the United States has not offered financial compensation to any Guantánamo …

Fair Trade: The President’S Power To Recover Captured U.S. Servicemembers And The Recent Prisoner Exchange With The Taliban, Celidon Pitt

Fordham Law Review

    The Obama Administration’s controversial exchange of five Taliban detainees for a captured U.S. soldier in May 2014 reignited a heated debate over the proper scope of wartime executive authority. From a legal perspective, the primary issue centers on the constitutional balance of power between congressional appropriations and the President’s power as Commander in Chief. A complete analysis incorporates both judicial and historical precedent to evaluate the conflict within the broader context of prisoner recovery efforts.

    This Note argues that, regardless of the validity of legislative restrictions on the transfer of Guantánamo detainees, the President possessed sufficient authority to conduct 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 …

Qualified Immunity, Constitutional Stagnation, And The Global War On Terror, Sarah L. Lochner

Northwestern University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Military Tribunals And Due Process In Post-Revolutionary Egypt, Bianca C. Isaias

The International Lawyer

No abstract provided.

Is Military Justice Sentencing On The March? Should It Be? And If So, Where Should It Head? Court-Martial Sentencing Process, Practice, And Issues, James E. Baker

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This article starts with a sketch of the military justice system to orient readers. Understanding that structure, the article then describes the sentencing process for special and general courts-martial. The article follows by identifying two core military sentencing questions: First, should commanders have authority to grant clemency? Second, should the military justice system adopt sentencing guidelines? With respect to each topic presented, the article does not attempt to answer the questions nor offer prescriptions. Rather, it seeks to identify the principal fault lines around which debate should, or will likely, fall. The article next presents ‘‘nutshell’’ introductions to additional sentencing …

War Over Words: Reinterpreting "Hostilities" And The War Powers Resolution, Eileen Burgin

Brigham Young University Journal of Public 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.

Trade, Bert Chapman

Libraries Faculty and Staff Scholarship and Research

Provides a historical overview of analysis of U.S. foreign trade policy during the early decades of the country's history. Examines bilateral U.S. trade relations with France and Great Britain, provides import and export statistics, details on commodities and products imports and exported, trade statistics, and information on the political and economic factors shaping U.S. trade during this period.

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 …

Game Of Bombs: President Barack Obama’S Nuclear Nonproliferation Regime, Jeffrey F. Addicott

University of Baltimore Journal of International Law

One of President Barack Obama’s favorite solutions to reducing or halting armed conflict in the world centers around his often-stated desire to rid the world of nuclear weapons. While this simplistic formula for a more peaceful world has certainly been voiced by other occupants of the oval office, the world is, and always has been, an extremely dangerous place, and the machinations of competing spheres of power in a “Game of Thrones” will always exist in human history. Coupled with an aggressive Russia and China, the dangers associated with the new era of radical Islamic extremism rubricate the need to …

The Drone Games, 47 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1507 (2014), Elizabeth Fleming

UIC Law Review

This Comment focuses on the Executive’s power to target American citizens who are believed to be terrorists abroad and the due process implications of such attacks. Part II provides background information pertaining to the rise

More Bang For Their Buck: How Federal Dollars Are Militarizing American Law Enforcement, 47 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1479 (2014), Jeffrey Endebak

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

After The Aumf, Jennifer Daskal

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

Over a dozen years later, the AUMF — which has never been amended — remains the principal source of the U.S. government’s domestic legal authority to use military force against al Qaeda and its associates, both on the battlefields of Afghanistan and far beyond. But even as the statutory framework has remained unchanged, the facts on the ground have evolved dramatically, leading some to call for a new AUMF. In short, calls for a new framework statute to replace the AUMF are unnecessary, provocative, and counterproductive; they perpetuate war at a time when we should be seeking to end it. …

Contemporary Practice Of The United States Relating To International Law, April 2014, Kristina Daugirdas, Julian Davis Mortenson

Articles

• Another Mexican National Executed in Texas in Defiance of Avena Decision • Manhattan Arrest of Indian Consular Official Sparks Public Dispute Between the United States and India • United States Questions Claims Based on China’s “Nine-Dash Line” in the South China Sea • United States Takes Steps to Combat Illegal Trade in Wildlife • U.S. Compromises Facilitate Agreement on World Trade Organization’s Bali Package; Question Remains Whether Bali Package Requires Congressional Approval • Destruction of Syrian Chemical Arms Delayed • Iran Nuclear Agreement Is Implemented Notwithstanding Expressions of Distrust by Iran and the U.S. Congress