In association with the International Commission of Jurists

Search: self-defense

08 Feb

the threat through its military deployments, but it has not clearly indicated that it will use force unless its demands are met by NATO states. Indeed, it has denied that it intends to use force. Are there any possible justifications for the threat or use of force should it come to that in this instance? First, there is the possible justification of self-defence. Russia claims to be acting in the face of an ever more threatening posture of NATO forces surrounding it.  However, self-defence is only permissible in response to...
08.02.22 | |

16 May

...international legal problems—even the most intractable ones—must be balanced with a regard for common interests and fundamental principles. Chief among these is the right to self-determination. Unlike in bygone eras, international law no longer conceives of territories as mere pieces of property to be traded or conquered. Today, human beings are properly held to be at the center of international law. The self-determination of peoples is embraced in Article 1(2) of the UN Charter, which proclaims that a major purpose of the United Nations is to “develop friendly relations among...
16.05.16 | |

28 Sep

...none of us is safe. And here, in relevant part, is Wittes’ response (emphasis mine): So the real authority is limited not just by geography and governance but by the nature of the target himself. That is, the president may only target an American national when when he has concluded in good faith that this person is either covered by the AUMF or poses a sufficiently-immediate threat to the country so as to trigger its right to self-defense. In other words, Adam’s fear that “the president can have someone executed...
28.09.10 | |

05 Sep

Anyone familiar with foreign relations law hears the common refrain that treaties almost never supersede statutes under the last-in-time rule. Until recently, it was certainly my understanding that the ancient Supreme Court case of Cook v. United States was the only significant example in which a self-executing treaty trumped an earlier conflicting statute. But my recent research on the last-in-time rule indicates that there are several examples in which that rule has been applied to give effect to a self-executing treaty that conflicts with an earlier federal statute. In particular,...
05.09.14 | |

06 Apr

the belief that the “self-executing” language had been sneakily inserted by members of his party in order to make the law ineffective upon passage. “Wait, what?” the 75 year old lawmaker, who has served in the Senate for 16 years, exclaimed. “I literally thought ‘self-executing’ mean that the law would be dead on arrival. Well, this is embarrassing,” he admitted to the audience, which consisted primarily of law students and a reasonable number of Cambridge hobos, many of whom were the most amused at Inhofe’s error. “I mean, this is...
06.04.10 | |

06 Apr

rights to "individual, or collective self-defense," under Article 51 of the U.N. Charter! If Hamas continues to launch its rockets from population centers, Israel must take such measures as are feasible to minimize civilian casualties, but is not otherwise required to refrain from responding to threats to its national security. The unvarnished reality is that this conflict will continue until either Israel devastates Gaza in this perpetual war, or the Hamas barbarians succeed on the battlefield, which seems even far less likely to occur! Kevin Jon Heller Mike 71, With...
06.04.11 | |

29 Sep

I just wanted to note that I have posted to SSRN The Language of Law and the Practice of Politics: Great Powers and the Rhetoric of Self-Determination in the Cases of Kosovo and South Ossetia, which is part of the special issue of the Chicago Journal of International Law about great power politics to which Ken has referred a couple of times. Here’s the abstract: This Article, written for a special issue of the Chicago Journal of International Law concerning great power politics, seeks to elucidate whether and how international...
29.09.09 | |

08 Jun

lack of analysis of congressional-executive agreements. One of his most salient points is that our book argues for an international agreement-making process that is way too onerous to be practical or to fit within the Framer’s original understanding of the U.S. Constitution. I have some responses: 1) It’s not really that hard since many treaties today are non-self-executing; 2) the Framers envisioned at least some non-self-executing treaties could be made. In any event, it is not a long podcast and Marty’s thoughts on most questions is definitely worth listening to....
08.06.12 | |

13 Oct

Jordan Serious problems exist with the law of war rationale, because under international law the U.S. simply cannot be at war or in an armed conflict with al Qaeda. The alternative expressed previously by the Executive is the law of self-defense, the self-defense paradigm, which permits targetings of those who are DPAA as well as their capture. Another problem is that a U.S. warship is the equivalent of U.S. territory under international law and the Constitution. Boumediene and the many cases cited therein, plus Toscanino and Tiede, the recognitions in...
13.10.13 | |

15 Feb

...ruling that the Texas courts did not have to respect the international tribunal’s ruling because the treaty provision (UN Charter Article 94) was “non-self-executing.” In other words, the treaty itself did not merit Supremacy Clause effect in the face of “Contrary” state law, but required an implementing federal statute to have such effect. How can this be squared with the plain language of the Supremacy Clause, which does not distinguish between treaties or statutes in ordaining what is the “supreme Law of the Land”? David Sloss’s marvelous book The Death...
15.02.17 | |

17 Mar

...domestic constitutional issue. The more interesting question involves implied immunity under the self-defense paradigm when laws of war are not applicable (as noted in my 19 J. Trans. L. & Pol'y article in 2009). If targeting is permissible under the law of self-defense (in time of peace or in time of war), it appears that general patterns of practice and opinio juris regarding such practices support an implied immunity for lawful self-defense targetings (no known prosecutions, etc.). This should also inform the domestic constitutional issue. Kevin Jon Heller John, The...
17.03.13 | |

01 Sep

...way they did was one basic and crucial rationale: "This takes foremost into account Israel's right to self-defense against armed attacks from outside its territory". That is it. That is the sole justification of the blockade. Israel's right to defend itself. The fact that a very notable manual was written or that tradition has it that naval blockades were only imposed in IACs does not change this truth. The truth is that we should not force states to fight terror with one hand tied behind their backs. The fact that...
01.09.11 | |