In association with the International Commission of Jurists

Search: self-defense

25 Mar

decision implies an automatic assignment to the judiciary of the authority to ensure that the commitment is honored. • Although the opinion is limited in the sense that it does not offer a general rule for inferring self-executing from treaties, its dicta states strong views (it might be too strong to say it disposes of) concerning several controversies that the academic community has taken seriously. (a) The Court understands self-execution to refer to all forms of domestic enforcement, not just to the existence of a private right of action. Its...
25.03.08 | |

31 Mar

...deployments, similar emotions had been controlled by him. The appellant’s decision to kill was probably impulsive and the adjustment disorder had led to an abnormality of mental functioning that substantially impaired his ability to exercise self-control. In our judgement the adjustment disorder from which he was suffering at the time also impaired his ability to exercise self-control. Third, and finally, CMAC concluded (para. 114) that because Blackman could not form a rational judgment at the time of the killing as a result of his adjustment disorder, he was entitled to...
31.03.17 | |

30 Jul

...account their way of life and the potential impact on it. The IACtHR underscored the inextricable link between the Tagaeri and Taromenane’s territory and their survival as ecosystemic peoples. Their right to collective property, self-determination, and autonomy is contingent on preserving their land and strictly enforcing the principle of non-contact. Yet, Ecuador’s handling of oil exploitation in Yasuní Park revealed a glaring failure to uphold these protections. One aspect that is decisive to the finding of a violation of the right to collective property and self-determination is the nomadic nature...
30.07.25 | |

30 Aug

...avoid the questions of territorial sovereignty. Self-determination does not answer the question of the geographical unit in which it is exercised. Armenians, for example, do not principally have a preexisting sovereignty claim to Nagorno-Karabakh. Rather, they see Armenian control as an exercise of the self-determination of the Karabakh population. Similarly, Russia justifies its occupation not on prior title but on the self-determination of the Crimean population. International law rejects this argument, and regards Armenian control as an occupation, because the standard lines in which self-determination is exercised is the preexisting...
30.08.17 | |

14 Mar

...sovereign immunity. The symposium contributors have addressed a number of specific propositions in the book. Here are some brief comments on each of their posts: 1. David Moore contends that the Supreme Court’s decision in Medellin v. Texas need not be read as rejecting all multi-factored approaches to self-execution. I agree and did not mean to suggest otherwise in the book. I read Medellin as rejecting only the approach of the dissent, whereby the same treaty provision might be self-executing in some cases but not in others depending on how...
14.03.13 | |

27 Dec

...Finally, I suggest one recent law review article that considers one of the most important areas of technological innovation: self-replicating technology. But my St. John’s colleague Jeremy Sheff looks at a self-replicating technology that is already here and ubiquitous: the seed. Here’s the abstract: Self-replicating technologies pose a challenge to the legal regimes we ordinarily rely on to promote a balance between innovation and competition. This article examines recent efforts by the federal courts to deal with the leading edge of this policy challenge in cases involving the quintessential self-replicating...
27.12.12 | |

17 Feb

...in international affairs might prefer such a constitutional design. However, Professor Stewart is certainly not in that camp, nor were the Founders. Third, one modern permutation of self-execution doctrine—the “no judicial enforcement” doctrine—allows state governments to impose sanctions on a criminal defendant in violation of supreme federal (treaty) law, without addressing the merits of defendant’s treaty-based defense. The Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause guarantees every state criminal defendant an opportunity to be heard on the merits of a federal defense to state criminal charges. Therefore, as I contend in Chapter...
17.02.17 | |

01 Apr

...independence under the “sacred trust of civilisation” and its right to self-determination under the UN Charter”. However, Palestinian self-determination cannot negate Israel’s territorial claims or the principle of territorial integrity; at most they imply the existence of competing claims which must be addressed in a final resolution. Of course, the existence of self-determination rights does not dictate the precise territorial scope in which they can be exercised [nor does it mandate a separate state; see Reference re Secession of Quebec]. A conflicting Palestinian right would not necessarily detract from Israeli...
01.04.24 | |

20 May

Over at National Security Advisors, our colleague Dave Glazier has a superb post on whether the Gitmo defense attorneys are responsible for the ills of the military commissions, as the Wall Street Journal‘s far-right editorial page seems to believe. Here’s the intro: The Wall Street Journal published a scathing editorial today blasting the military and civilian defense attorneys it portrays as unreasonably obstructing the capital military commission prosecutions of high value terrorists, including alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM). It is not surprising that a paper noted for its...
20.05.08 | |

19 Sep

I stand behind my description of Yoo, but Julian’s thoughtful post deserves a less facile response. So let’s consider Yoo’s claim about Clinton’s violation of the War Powers Act. Here is Julian’s explanation of why Yoo’s attack on Clinton is not inconsistent with his defense of Bush: His complaint about Clinton’s violation of the War Powers Act is that Clinton didn’t bother to claim that the War Powers Act is unconstitutional (in fact, according to Yoo, Clinton actually accepted the legality of the War Powers Act). Instead, Clinton simply violated...
19.09.06 | |

19 Jan

...argues here). Having said all that, a favorable decision for the petitioners in Bond could still have a practical impact by reviving that almost extinct constitutional creature: the self-executing treaty. The President and Senate, at least in the past few decades, have very rarely approved self-executing treaties outside of a few subject matter areas (like taxes, extradition, and investment). Big important treaties, such as human rights treaties, have generally been approved on the condition they are non-self-executing. (Go ahead, name the most important self-executing treaty of the past thirty years....
19.01.13 | |

11 Apr

...the treaty power’s scope and devised its own mechanisms for accommodating federalism in U.S. treaties. To date, however, scholars have largely ignored the Executive’s efforts to self-judge when and how federalism limits U.S. treaty-making–efforts that I label “Executive Federalism.” But Executive Federalism has significant domestic and international ramifications. First, it requires rethinking federalism’s nature by demonstrating that federalism need not function solely as a judicial or legislative safeguard for states’ rights. Second, while it serves as a vehicle for Executive self-restraint, Executive Federalism still has structural implications, weakening the authority...
11.04.06 | |