Next Thursday, the Supreme Court will decide whether or not to grant certiorari in United States v. Ali–the case in which the highest court in the military justice system, the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF), unanimously … Read more »
As Raff noted last week, the lawyers for the defendant-appellant in United States v. al-Bahlul–the military commission case in which the D.C. Circuit surprisingly granted rehearing en banc–had moved to “clarify” the scope of such rehearing, including … Read more »
A very interesting post on the New York Times‘s FiveThirtyEight blog argues that, while Americans think future terrorist attacks are likely, they’re also increasingly “skeptical about sacrificing personal freedoms for security.” A Fox News poll right after 9/11 found … Read more »
Regular readers may recall my and Wells‘s posts on the public/media access issues that arose out of the 9/11 military commission trial, along with the (in my view, erroneous) resolution of the ACLU and media appeals last month by … Read more »
As the recent decisions by the Court of Military Commission Review (CMCR) in the Guantánamo military commission ACLU/media access cases suggests, there are a host of complicated and heretofore unresolved questions about the scope of appellate and collateral review of … Read more »
This could be a very big deal… Judge Susan Illston of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California has issued a 24-page opinion striking down 18 U.S.C. §§ 2709(c) and 3511(b)–the provisions that prohibit the recipients … Read more »
The more I reflect on last week’s drone contretemps–and what effect the efforts of Senator Paul and his followers has had / may still have on U.S. policy–the more I have a profound and distressing sense of déjà vu. After … Read more »
I’m not at all happy that today’s news out of upstate New York proves the point that Jack and I (and a cast of dozens) have tried to make about domestic use of lethal force, but it’s worth pointing out … Read more »
As you no doubt already know, Kentucky’s junior Senator, Rand Paul, on Wednesday filibustered John O. Brennan’s nomination to be CIA Director for thirteen hours (with help, in part, from his Senate colleagues).
He commenced his marathon like so:
Madam
Last June, a collection of advocacy and religious organizations, businesses, and individuals in New York City and New Jersey filed a federal lawsuit against the City of New York, alleging the New York City Police Department’s (NYPD) “illegal targeting of … Read more »
One of the more interesting structural constitutional questions to emerge from the post-9/11 detention litigation has been the previously under-explored relationship between the Constitution’s Suspension and Due Process Clauses–and the extent to which they might do separate work with regard … Read more »
For those who can’t get in to the Supreme Court oral argument in Shelby County v. Holder, and who aren’t otherwise enticed by the Journal of National Security Law & Policy‘s inaugural symposium, “Swimming in the Ocean … Read more »
There’s been a fair amount of buzz over the past few days centered around the idea of a statutory “drone court”–a tribunal modeled after the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) that would (presumably) provide at least some modicum of due … Read more »
There’s certainly a lot to say about the DOJ white paper on targeted killings, much of which has been said already (and well) by others (see Raff’s “Headlines and Commentary” post for links). At the risk of being unintentionally … Read more »
A while back, I posted about a forthcoming article by Carlos Vázquez (Georgetown) and me on the relationship between Bivens remedies and state law, especially in national security cases. I’m very pleased to say that the published version of … Read more »
Yesterday, we posted the government’s supplemental brief in the Al Bahlul military commission appeal in the D.C. Circuit, the headline of which was the government’s concession that Judge Kavanaugh’s opinion for the Court of Appeals in Hamdan II requires reversal … Read more »
Under the snazzy headline “Renditions continue under Obama, despite due-process concerns,” today’s Washington Post has a long article on the overseas arrest, detention, and subsequent criminal indictment in New York (civilian) federal court of three “European men with Somali roots.” … Read more »
Back in early November, Ben and I blogged about Fordham Professor Andrew Kent’s provocative new essay, “Do Boumediene Rights Expire?,” which he published in “PENNumbra,” the online companion to the University of Pennsylvania Law Review. … Read more »
As Wells and Steve noted last week, the Senate approved the “Feinstein Amendment” to the FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The Amendment, if enacted, would impose a clear statement rule for the detention of U.S. citizens and … Read more »
Wells is exactly right–and Senators Levin and Graham are exactly wrong–about the implications of last night’s Senate vote approving Senator Feinstein’s amendment to the FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act. Wells linked to the amendment, but here is the relevant … Read more »
In the category of shameless self-promotion, I am quite pleased to announce the publication of National Security Law in the News: A Guide for Journalists, Scholars, and Policymakers. The book is a joint publication of the ABA Standing Committee on … Read more »
Readers probably won’t be surprised that, as Professor Andrew Kent noted at the end of his guest post, I’ve already drafted a longer response to Andrew’s important and provocative new essay, “Do Boumediene Rights Expire?” — which … Read more »
[Update (11:41 a.m. EDT)]: The always reliable Josh Gerstein already had a story up on this late last night over @ Politico, which reports that an “administration official” suggested that “Friday’s filings were made in order to keep open … Read more »
The Supreme Court is not the only branch of government focused on FISA. As many Lawfare readers will recall, Congress is currently considering reauthorizing Title VII of FISA, which is scheduled to expire at the end of the … Read more »
Back in March, we posted this teaser for our then-draft chapter on civil liberties and executive power during the War of 1812 which, as you all know, is celebrating its 200th anniversary this year. The book, What so Proudly we … Read more »
Thanks to an unexpected pair of days off, I’ve finally had the chance to review Judge Bates’s October 19 rulings in Al-Maqaleh v. Gates ["Al-Maqaleh II"] and Hamidullah v. Obama. As readers know, these are the habeas … Read more »
Steve, Ben, Jack, and Bobby have already posted some excellent thoughts on the DC Circuit’s decision in Hamdan II. I agree with many of them. In particular, I think Jack is right to suggest that, wholly … Read more »
Five brief thoughts on yesterday’s Hamdan decision:
First, I am less confident than Steve and Ben that this opinion forecloses conspiracy claims in military commissions. The historical arguments for a conspiracy charge in military commissions under the laws of … Read more »
I largely agree with Steve’s excellent post on the D.C. Circuit’s Hamdan decision today. In particular, and most importantly, I agree that the logic of the opinion strongly indicates that military commissions will likely not be available to try allegations … Read more »
Raff already shared the news re: this morning’s D.C. Circuit decision reversing Salim Hamdan’s military commission conviction for providing material support to terrorism (MST), holding that MST wasn’t a recognized violation of the laws of war prior to 2006 (when … Read more »
I’d like to expand on Ben’s post below in relation to Hedges and the First Amendment, focusing on the “material support”/”substantial support” issue. (I’m having to write quickly, so please excuse any typos in what follows.)
Specifically, I’d like to … Read more »
Based on the voluminous media and blog coverage of last week’s decision in Hedges v. Obama, in which Judge Forrest permanently enjoined at least part of the detention provision of the FY2012 NDAA [section 1021(b)(2)], one of two things … Read more »
I don’t have a lot to add to Ben’s analysis of Judge Forrest’s decision yesterday in Hedges v. Obama, permanently enjoining section 1021(b)(2) of the FY2012 NDAA (Just to refresh our memories, that section authorizes the detention of “A … Read more »
In an earlier post, here, I described an article I was working on, with my colleague Sam Issacharoff, on detention, targeted killings, and the fundamental transformation we see taking place in the practice, morality, and law concerning the legitimate … Read more »
With a hat tip to Bobby, I wanted to flag that the Fourth Circuit on Friday upheld the conviction of Sean Brehm, a non-citizen convicted under the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act (MEJA) for an offense committed against another non-citizen on … Read more »
I am normally pretty good about keeping up with my Lawfare-related email, but sometimes, an important emails slips through the cracks. Andrew Kent of Fordham Law School sent me this comment on my post on the new Al Aulaqi… Read more »
I received the following response from Richard Klingler to my ACSblog post on Monday re: the Al-Aulaqi suit and Bivens, and thought I’d post it in its entirety (below the fold) before replying (also below the fold):
I will soon be posting on SSRN, with my co-author Sam Issacharoff, a draft academic article that offers a broad, integrated conceptual and legal framework for understanding specific counterterrorism legal and policy issues, such as detention and targeted killings. Given … Read more »
Over at the ACSblog, I have a guest post up on Al-Aulaqi v. Panetta and Ben’s suspicion that the lawsuit will go the way of Arar, Lebron, Doe, and Rasul–with courts holding that there should be … Read more »
As I noted yesterday, the highest court in the U.S. military justice system—the Article I Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (“CAAF”), a circuit-level court with mostly discretionary jurisdiction over each of the service branch courts of criminal … Read more »
Ben already posted last week about the new battle a-brewing over the “Memorandum of Understanding” (MOU) that the Department of Justice is apparently requiring counsel in the Guantanamo habeas cases to sign in order to continue meeting with … Read more »
According to various media reports, General Stanley McChrystal suggested late last month that the United States should bring back the draft if it goes to war again, arguing that the costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have … Read more »
Apropos of Steve’s fascinating post (and essay) concerning judicial reluctance to permit civil suits to go forward in national security related cases: new developments in connection with the al-Kidd litigation.
Faced with summary judgment motions from al-Kidd, the US … Read more »
Why have victims of alleged governmental misconduct arising out of post-September 11 counter-terrorism policies met with virtually no success thus far in pursuing damages claims arising out of the government’s claimed abuses? It can’t be the lack of merit to … Read more »
I have not linked to the reviews of my book Power and Constraint as they have appeared, but by now there are enough reviews – by Gary Schmitt in the Weekly Standard, Christopher Caldwell in the NYT, Roger … Read more »
Yesterday’s news out of the Supreme Court may well have obscured another significant detainee-related legal development: As Lyle Denniston has noted over at SCOTUSblog, on Friday, the en banc Ninth Circuit handed down a thoroughly fractured decision in Garcia … Read more »
I’ve gotten lots of helpful feedback both on- and offline re: yesterday’s post on Clapper v. Amnesty International, and wanted to write in a bit more detail about (my understanding of) the foreign intelligence surveillance exception to the Fourth … Read more »
In light of the Supreme Court’s grant of certiorari yesterday to review the Second Circuit’s decision in Clapper v. Amnesty International, I thought I’d put together a background post trying to explain why, in my view, Clapper is such … Read more »
Amidst all the discussion of whether and how to amend the House NDAA bill to address domestic captures, I am amazed that I did not notice the Rooney Amendment, which has been adopted. What does it do? Well, it … Read more »
A few reflections on Hedges v. Obama, enjoining at least some aspects of section 1021 of the NDAA:
A Self-Inflicted Wound? Let me begin by saying that I agree with Steve: it does seem from the opinion that … Read more »
Friday, May 17, 2013
The Department of Justice’s Inspector General released an interim report on the Department’s handling of “known or suspected” terrorists who have entered the government’s witness protection program. The report found, among other things, that information on some program participants had not been turned over to no-fly list authorities; and, that two such people could not be located—though one… Read more »
