Recent Posts

In his latest post, John Bellinger claims that “[c]ritics will now accept virtually any speculation and rumor and circulate them as fact,” even though “[a]llegations about U.S. military or intelligence activities have become so hyperbolic as to be absurd.” He may well be right on the first count, but he has completely failed to prove the second. With...

As I look to wrap up what has been an energetic and stimulating dialogue on a host of international legal issues, I would like to post some responses now, and will conclude next week. Let me reiterate how much we appreciate the comments, especially from those who have provided detailed legal and historical analysis. For too long, the discourse...

Just to keep our readers in the loop, we are still expecting John Bellinger to post later tonight or early tomorrow morning a response to some of the comments on his postings from throughout the week. I also understand that John may be kind enough to do even more follow-up responsive blogging next week. So stay tuned. ...

[Opinio Juris welcomes Professor David Golove of New York University School of Law as a guest respondent. Professor Golove's teaching and scholarship is focused on the foreign relations law of the United States and on constituional law.] In his recent post, Julian asks whether the President has domestic constitutional authority to adopt a "new" interpretation of the laws of war. ...

My thanks to Opinio Juris for organizing this remarkable discussion, and to John and all the guest respondents and those commenting for taking part. Opinio Juris is one of the most refreshing blogs around because its bloggers have a wide range of political views, eclectic interests, and strongly held opinion – and yet its discussions are always unfailingly polite,...

[Opinio Juris welcomes Professor David Sloss as a guest respondent. Professor Sloss is an expert on foreign relations law (among other areas) and he teaches at Saint Louis University School of Law. His recent articles can be found here.] I want to thank John Bellinger for his recent posts on this blog. He has presented a very thoughtful and...

John Bellinger’s latest post raises two interesting questions, the first about the function of immunities and the other about the role of the executive branch (specifically, the State Department) in litigation against foreign interests. The immunities rules straightforwardly recognize that what we traditionally regard as core features of judicial competence do not extend, at least not fully, to foreigners. We...

Since readers have no doubt tired of the law of war by now, I would like to change topics and address some of the immunity issues that confront L on a regular basis. Most of you are familiar with the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA), 28 U.S.C. 1330, 1602 et seq., which codified the restrictive theory of the immunity...

This exchange between John Bellinger and our terrific group of guests and commenters has been so fascinating that I hesitate to intervene. But the last few posts have moved me to pose a fundamental domestic U.S. law question to John and our readers. Who has the authority to interpret or re-interpret the laws of war on behalf of...

[Opinio Juris welcomes Professor Ken Anderson as a guest respondent. Professor Anderson teaches at American University's Washington College of Law. He also is a Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. He regularly blogs at his Ken Anderson's Law of War blog] I am in agreement with John’s characterization of the legal and historical-legal status of...