As readers know, a few of us on the blog have been debating whether the law of neutrality has any relevance to the United States' conflict with al-Qaeda. I'm thus delighted to announce that three essays on that very issue are now available on SSRN as part of a mini-symposium hosted by the Texas International Law Journal. The lead essay...
It appears the right-wing has settled on a shiny new historical comparison to justify the targeted killing of Anwar al-Awlaki. Here is Jack Goldsmith in the New York Times: An attack on an enemy soldier during war is not an assassination. During World War II, the United States targeted and killed Adm. Isoroku Yamamoto, the architect of the Japanese...
The following is a guest-post by David Glazier, Associate Professor of Law at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles. Our thanks to him for providing it. As Kevin noted on Wednesday, the Department of Defense approved military commission charges against Abd Al Rahim Hussayn Muhammad Al Nashiri, alleged USS Cole bombing mastermind, clearing the way for his arraignment and subsequent trial. ...
Moreno-Ocampo has always had the reputation of being more politically savvy than legally savvy. Frankly, he seems completely politically tone-deaf to me. Witness his recent comments on the implications of a possible UN General Assembly decision to give Palestine "observer state" status: A few blocks away from the UN this week, the man at the centre of the controversy said...
The United States has formally referred military-commission charges against Abd al-Rahim Al-Nashiri for his alleged involvement in a number of terrorist attacks between 2000 and 2002. Here is Bobby Chesney's helpful description of the charges: Charge 1: Using Treachery/Perfidy (10 USC 950t(17)) – the idea here is that the use of a civilian boat, civilian clothing, and so forth to...
Check out the following ad for the new Audi A6: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeuveTXuNho&feature=relmfu You know you're in trouble when a German company is using the decaying state of America's infrastructure to sell cars. Then again, when you think about it, the ad is actually kind of a Republican utopia: austerity and expensive, environment-destroying luxury goods all in one. Why fix the roads when your...
Following Talisman Energy, the Fourth Circuit has now held in Aziz v. Alcolac, another ATS case, that the mens rea of aiding and abetting under the "law of nations" is intent, not knowledge. That's plainly wrong, as I have pointed out before, so there is no point dwelling on the new decision. But this paragraph deserves specific mention, because it...
Fantastic news: New York – A federal appeals court vacated an order Monday by a New York judge that barred an $18 billion judgment in Ecuador against Chevron Inc. for contaminating the Amazon. The three-judge panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had previously expressed skepticism that a New York judge could wield jurisdiction outside...
One of the most remarkable aspects of how conservative U.S. scholars approach international law is their absolute certainty that the American position on extraordinarily difficult issues is always correct. Consider, for example, Jack Goldsmith's articulation today of when the UN Charter permits the U.S. to use force in self-defense against non-state actors: If the president is authorized to use force against...
Peter Margulies (Roger Williams) responded to my blogging about criminal membership and al-Bahlul at Lawfare. I wrote a response, which Lawfare's Bobby Chesney was kind enough to post for me. Instead of reposting the lengthy exchange here, interested readers should check out the posts at Lawfare. You can find Peter's original post here, and my response here. Feel free to...
As I noted in my previous post, the CMCR's opinion in al-Bahlul repeatedly cites the Nuremberg-era crime of criminal membership in defense of its belief that material support for terrorism and conspiracy qualify as war crimes. I continue to believe that the best counter-arguments to that idea are (1) that criminal membership was not a war crime at Nuremberg (the...
Even I thought the Court of Military Commission Review couldn't reach such an absurd conclusion. I was wrong: The Government has made a “substantial showing" that the conduct alleged, including appellant’s (an AUEC’s) agreement with bin Laden and others to commit the object offenses, with knowledge of and intent to further the unlawful purposes of that agreement, and commission of the...
