President/Executive Department Commons^™

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. …

The Courts And National Security: The Ordeal Of The State Secrets Privilege, David Rudenstine

Articles

The state secrets privilege, originally established in United States v. Reynolds, has evolved into a powerful tool for the Executive to shield actions from judicial scrutiny, undermining the rule of law and constitutional checks and balances. This expansion, driven by judicial deference and circuit court interpretations, now prioritizes national security over accountability, threatening core legal principles. The article argues for reform to balance national security concerns with judicial oversight and individual rights.

Export Controls: A Contemporary History, Bert Chapman

Libraries Faculty and Staff Presentations

Provides highlights of my recently published book Export Controls: A Contemporary History. Describes the roles played by multiple U.S. Government agencies and congressional oversight committees in this policymaking arena including the Commerce, Defense, State, and Treasury Departments. It also reviews the roles played by international government organizations such as the Missile Technology Control Regime, export oriented businesses, and research intensive universities.

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.

Energy, U.S. Department Of, Bert Chapman

Libraries Faculty and Staff Scholarship and Research

Provides information about the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and its predecessor agencies and how DOE influences federal energy policy and scientific research in the western U.S.

Oil Industry, Bert Chapman

Libraries Faculty and Staff Scholarship and Research

Provides an overview of the historical and contemporary development of the American oil industry and how it has impacted U.S. natural resources policies in the American west.

Toward Comprehensive Reform Of America's Emergency Law Regime, Patrick A. Thronson

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Unbenownst to most Americans, the United States is presently under thirty presidentially declared states of emergency. They confer vast powers on the Executive Branch, including the ability to financially incapacitate any person or organization in the United States, seize control of the nation's communications infrastructure, mobilize military forces, expand the permissible size of the military without congressional authorization, and extend tours of duty without consent from service personnel. Declared states of emergency may also activate Presidential Emergency Action Documents and other continuity-of-government procedures, which confer powers on the President-such as the unilateral suspension of habeas corpus-that appear fundamentally opposed to …

Stochastic Constraint, Neal K. Katyal

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This essay reviews Power and Constraint: The Accountable Presidency After 9/11 by Jack Goldsmith (2012).

With The Terror Presidency, Professor Jack Goldsmith wrote, hands down, the very best analysis of the national security issues surrounding President George W. Bush's tenure. In Power and Constraint: The Accountable Presidency After 9/11, Goldsmith returns to the same set of problems, but adopts a different tack. He argues that the modern wartime Executive is constrained in new ways beyond the traditional system of checks and balances, and that these new constraints combine to create an effective system that checks executive power. Though …

Cyberattacks And The Covert Action Statute: Toward A Domestic Legal Framework For Offensive Cyberoperations, Aaron P. Brecher

Michigan Law Review

Cyberattacks are capable of penetrating and disabling vital national infrastructure, causing catastrophic economic harms, and approximating the effects of war, all from remote locations and without the use of conventional weapons. They can be nearly impossible to attribute definitively to their sources and require relatively few resources to launch. The United States is vulnerable to cyberattacks but also uniquely capable of carrying out cyberattacks of its own. To do so effectively, the United States requires a legal regime that is well suited to cyberattacks' unique attributes and that preserves executive discretion while inducing the executive branch to coordinate with Congress. …

Boland In The Wind: The Iran-Contra Affair And The Invitation To Struggle , Bretton G. Sciaroni

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Who Decides On Security?, Aziz Rana

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Despite over six decades of reform initiatives, the overwhelming drift of security arrangements in the United States has been toward greater—not less— executive centralization and discretion. This Article explores why efforts to curb presidential prerogative have failed so consistently. It argues that while constitutional scholars have overwhelmingly focused their attention on procedural solutions, the underlying reason for the growth of emergency powers is ultimately political rather than purely legal. In particular, scholars have ignored how the basic meaning of "security" has itself shifted dramatically since World War II and the beginning of the Cold War in line with changing ideas …

The Iranian Hostage Crisis And The Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal: Implications For International Dispute Resolution And Diplomacy, Warren Christopher, Richard M. Mosk

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

This is the twenty-fifth anniversary of what has become known as the Iranian Hostage Crisis. We shall look back on those events in order to point to possible issues, lessons and solutions for the future.

The Assault Of Jamie Leigh Jones: How One Woman's Horror Story Is Changing Arbitration In America, Jeffrey Adams

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

This article examines Jones v. Halliburton Co., the "Al Franken Amendment" to the 2010 U.S. Defense Department Budget (Franken Amendment) that was created in response to Jones, and the impact that both could have on mandatory arbitration clauses in employment contracts in the future. Part II recounts the troubling events that led to Jones and the inclusion of the Franken Amendment in the 2010 Defense Department Budget. Part III details the arguments made for and against the inclusion of the Franken Amendment. Part IV analyzes the impact that the Franken Amendment could have on mandatory arbitration clauses in contacts in …

Guy Fawkes's Dangerous Remedy: The Unconstitutionality Of Government-Ordered Assassination Against U.S. Citizens And Its Implications For Due Process In America, 45 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1121 (2012), Emily Kendall

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Stoney Road Out Of Eden: The Struggle To Recover Insurance For Armenian Genocide Deaths And Its Implications For The Future Of State Authority, Contract Rights, And Human Rights, Jeffrey W. Stempel, Sarig Armenian, David Mcclure

Scholarly Works

The Armenian Genocide during the waning days of the Ottoman Empire continues to represent one of history’s underappreciated atrocities. Comparatively few people even know about the 1.5 million deaths or the government-sponsored extermination attempt that provided Hitler with a blueprint for the Nazi Holocaust. Unlike the Holocaust, however, there was never any accounting demanded of those responsible for the Armenian Genocide. In the aftermath of both tragedies, insurers seized upon the resulting disarray and victimization to deny life insurance benefits owed as a result of the killings. American-based litigation to vindicate rights under the Armenian polices faced substantial legal and …

Assessing The Impeachment Of President Bill Clinton From A Post 9/11 Perspective, Susan Low Bloch

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The impeachment of President Clinton was more a circus than a serious effort to remove the President of the United States. The reason is simple: Few people--in the Congress or the country--wanted to remove him or believed the impeachment effort would actually result in his removal. Instead, it was a partisan political effort to embarrass Clinton and "send a message" of disapproval. Congress was attaching a "scarlet letter." But this was an indulgence that posed considerable danger that few in Congress considered. In particular, few tried to assess the potential impact this use of the process would have on the …

Ten Years On: Military Justice And Civil Liberties In The Post-9/11 Era, Eugene R. Fidell

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Samantar And Executive Power, Peter B. Rutledge

Scholarly Works

This essay examines Samantar v. Yousuf in the context of broader debate about the relationship between federal common law and executive power. Samantar represents simply the latest effort by the Executive Branch to literally shape the meaning of law through a process referred to in the literature as “executive lawmaking.” While traditional accounts of executive lawmaking typically have treated the idea as a singular concept, Samantar demonstrates the need to bifurcate the concept into at least two different categories: acts of executive lawmaking decoupled from pending litigation and acts of executive lawmaking taken expressly in response to litigation. As Samantar …

Obama's Failed Attempt To Close Gitmo: Why Executive Orders Can't Bring About Systemic Change, Erin B. Corcoran

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

[Excerpt] “In the lead up to the 2008 Presidential election, there was broad bipartisan support for closing the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay. President Bush was quoted as saying, “I’d like it to be over with.” John McCain and General Colin Powell echoed similar sentiments for ending detention at the naval base. In addition to prominent Republicans calling for closure, public opinion began to support finding alternative solutions for prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay.

Barack Obama wasted no time once sworn into office executing his central campaign promises. On January 22, 2009, two days after becoming the forty-fourth President of …

Uneasy Lies The Hand That Clicks The Mouse: Presidential Power And Wikileaks, Andrew Pekoe

Florida A & M University Law Review

No abstract provided.

An Unintended Casualty Of The War On Terror, Aya Gruber

Publications

As the dust of the Bush administration's war on terror settles, casualties are starting to appear on the legal battlefield. The United States' human rights reputation and the Supreme Court's international influence lay wounded in the wake of U.S. policies that flouted international law by advocating torture, suborning indefinite detention, and erecting irregular tribunals. Through declining citation, the courts of the world are telling the Supreme Court that if it does not respect international and foreign law, international and foreign courts will not respect it. Some might object that the Supreme Court should not be lumped with the Bush administration …

"Undead" Wartime Cases: Stare Decisis And The Lessons Of History, Harlan G. Cohen

Scholarly Works

References to the “lessons of history” are ubiquitous in law. Nowhere has this been more apparent than in recent debates over U.S. counterterrorism policy. In response to the Bush Administration’s reliance on World War II-era decisions - Johnson v. Eisentrager, Ex Parte Quirin, Hirota v. MacArthur, and In re Yamashita - opponents have argued that these decisions have been rejected by the “lessons of history.” They argue that the history of wartime cases is one marked by executive aggrandizement, panic-driven attacks on civil liberties, and overly quiescent courts - none of which should be repeated.

But what does it really …

"Undead" Wartime Cases: Stare Decisis And The Lessons Of History, Harlan G. Cohen

Faculty Scholarship

References to the “lessons of history” are ubiquitous in law. Nowhere has this been more apparent than in recent debates over U.S. counterterrorism policy. In response to the Bush Administration’s reliance on World War II-era decisions - Johnson v. Eisentrager, Ex Parte Quirin, Hirota v. MacArthur, and In re Yamashita - opponents have argued that these decisions have been rejected by the “lessons of history.” They argue that the history of wartime cases is one marked by executive aggrandizement, panic-driven attacks on civil liberties, and overly quiescent courts - none of which should be repeated.

But what does it really …

Placing Your Faith In The Constitution, Harold H. Bruff

Publications

No abstract provided.

Efficacy Of The Obama Policies To Combat Al-Qa'eda, The Taliban, And Associated Forces--The First Year, Jeffrey F. Addicott

Pace Law Review

No abstract provided.

Keeping Boumediene Off The Battlefield: Examining Potential Implications Of The Boumediene V. Bush Decision To The Conduct Of United States Military Operations, Fred K. Ford

Pace Law Review

No abstract provided.

Attorney General Robert Jackson's Brief Encounter With The Notion Of Preclusive Presidential Power, William R. Casto

Pace Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Founders, Executive Power, And Military Intervention, Christopher A. Preble

Pace Law Review

No abstract provided.

Legalism And Decisionism In Crisis, Noa Ben-Asher

Faculty Publications

In the years since September 11, 2001, scholars have advocated two main positions on the role of law and the proper balance of powers among the branches of government in emergencies. This Article critiques these two approaches-which could be called Legalism and Decisionism-and offers a third way. Debates between Legalism and Decisionism turn on (1) whether emergencies can be governed by prescribed legal norms; and (2) what the balance of powers among the three branches of government should be in emergencies. Under the Legalist approach, legal norms can and should guide governmental response to emergencies, and the executive branch is …

The Perilous Dialogue, Laura K. Donohue

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The master metaphor in the national security dialogue is, indeed, “security or freedom”. It dominates the counterterrorist discourse both in the United States and abroad. Transcripts from debates in Ireland’s Dáil Éireann, Turkey’s Büyük Millet Meclisi, and Australia’s Parliament are filled with reference to the need to weigh the value of liberty against the threat posed by terrorism. Perhaps nowhere is this more pronounced than in the United Kingdom, where, for decades, counterterrorist debates have turned on this framing. Owing in part, though, to different constitutional structures, what “security or freedom” means in America differs from what it means in …