In association with the International Commission of Jurists

National Security Law

05 Oct

Over at Lawfare, I've flagged a fine new article in the Military Law Review, "The Case of the Murdering Wives: Reid v. Covert and the Complicated Question of Civilians and Courts-Martial," by Captain Brittany Warren (Vol. 212. 2012, p. 133; link goes to jagcnet.army.mil.) The article goes into fascinating detail about the actual facts and circumstances of Reid v. Covert, as well as a discussion of historical practices dating back to 17th century Britain and the application of the Articles of War to "camp followers."  It then comes back to the present to discuss the circumstances of civilians in courts-martial in US law. Let me add a comment that goes far afield of Captain Warren's article, but one raised in my mind by the detailed discussion she offers of the "murdering wives case" in its own context and time.  (I don't want to suggest that my discussion reflects her views in that article, so I've decided to make it a separate post here at OJ.)   Reid v. Covert is a case sometimes raised in a different context - one for which it is not really dead-on, however, though sometimes referenced in relation to it.  Reid is the question of the extraterritorial application of the US Constitution, and whether a civilian US citizen lawfully present on a US military base in time of peace, with a SOFA in operation (ie, 1950s Germany), is entitled to a regular US civilian trial with all Constitutional protections in a capital murder case rather than trial in military court under the UCMJ - answer, yes. But, if that's Reid, what about a US citizen who has fled the US to places not controlled in law or fact by the US, and is engaged in violent operations against the US from abroad as part of a terrorist group - is that US citizen nonetheless entitled to trial in a regular civilian court, or at least some form of judicial due process, and at least an implication that this US citizen can't be lethally targeted in the way that a non-citizen lawful target could be?
|
02 Oct

As I suggested earlier, the President has ample legal authority to strike back at those responsible for the deaths of U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens and three other Americans in Libya. The NYT reports that the Pentagon is preparing to exercise this legal authority: The American military’s top-secret Joint Special Operations Command is preparing detailed information that could be used...

|
01 Oct

I realize this should have gone to our announcements section, but it seems well worth flagging.  As OJ readers are probably aware, the Kiobel case is being re-argued today in the Supreme Court.  Tomorrow my law school, Washington College of Law, American University, in DC, is holding a post-argument discussion with some stellar folks - Paul Hoffman (lead counsel for plaintiffs), Katie Redford (Earthrights International), John Bellinger (former DOS Legal Adviser and Arnold & Porter partner), and Andrew Grossman (Heritage Foundation).  WCL's own Steve Vladeck will moderate.  The event will also be live-streamed. Tuesday, October 2, 12-1:20, lunch included, and CLE credit available.  Registration required.  The flyer with online registration information is below the fold.
|
27 Sep

Benjamin Netanyahu is being suitably mocked for the Wily E. Coyote-like picture of a bomb he used at the UN to describe Israel's "red line" concerning Iran's purported efforts to build a nuclear weapon.  There's no need for me to pile on; even right-wingers are horrified, with Jeffrey Goldberg -- Jeffrey Goldberg! -- tweeting earlier today that "Netanyahu's bomb cartoon...

|
21 Sep

Just in case you are not yet convinced that the Obama administration's counterterrorism policies are actually worse than the Bush administration's: The officials said U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had made the decision to remove MEK from the list, and that it was expected to be formally announced in coming days. The State Department said that Clinton sent a classified communication...

|
19 Sep

Yesterday, Harold Koh, the Legal Adviser of the U.S. State Department, spoke at the U.S. Cyber Command Inter-Agency Legal Conference on the applicability of international law to cyberspace and, particularly, cyberwar/ cyberconflict. For a couple of takes on the speech, see the Washington Post here and Defense News, here. In our ongoing efforts to make full-text presentations of international...

|
12 Sep

Amidst the memorials to 9/11 yesterday came more tragic news with mob attacks on the U.S. embassy in Cairo and the consulate in Benghazi, including the deaths of U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.  My condolences go out to the victims' families and the U.S. Foreign Service community, the Marines who guard them, as well as the local...

|
11 Sep

Just another day in America's own gulag: A special Obama administration task force review found in 2009 that Latif, who had been held at Gitmo since early 2002 and had waged a long legal battle for his freedom, could be released, a conclusion that could only be reached by a unanimous vote of all U.S. intelligence agencies. That finding was buttressed a...

|
06 Sep

Having followed the terrorism litigation against Iran for years, I was fascinated to read of the recent legislation—Section 502 of the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights--that creates a legislative fix for victims of one particular group of terrorist victims but not thousands of others. The law in question grants plaintiffs/judgment creditors in one and only one case—Peterson...

|
31 Aug

A recent post at Mother Jones mentions my view of UBL's killing and provides Ken's brief thoughts on his death: Kenneth Anderson, a law professor at American University Washington School of Law, disagrees. "Being wounded does not necessarily render one hors de combat; hors de combat means they’re not actually posing a threat to you," Anderson says, citing moments where wounded...

|
29 Aug

Of the 1500+ posts I've written for Opinio Juris over the past seven years, none angered my fellow progressives more than the post in which I claimed that the killing of Usama bin Laden was perfectly legal under international law.  Here is what I wrote: To begin with, I think the applicable legal regime is international humanitarian law (IHL), not international...

|
22 Aug

Mark Klamberg, who is a lecturer in public international law at the University of Stockholm, has a detailed post on his personal blog about the likelihood -- or unlikelihood, to be more precise -- that Sweden would extradite Julian Assange to the United States.  He has kindly given me permission to reprint a significant portion of it (I've made minor...

|