This morning’s opinion in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum concludes that the presumption against extraterritoriality applies to claims brought under the Alien Tort Statute (“ATS”), and that nothing in the statute rebuts that presumption. The Court thus affirms the decision … 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 »
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 »
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 »
Over at SCOTUSblog, there’s a terrific symposium underway to celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of The Least Dangerous Branch, Alex Bickel’s seminal work on the Supreme Court and judicial review. My own contribution thereto–”The Passive Virtues as Means, Not … Read more »
Lawfare readers will recall that in March the Supreme Court ordered the case of Kiobel v Royal Dutch Petroleum to be re-briefed and reargued to address the additional question of whether the Alien Tort Statute applies to violations of international … Read more »
A few final thoughts on the topic of DC Circuit fidelity to Hamdi and Boumediene, for the three people still paying attention to us (hi Mom!). Steve’s reply to my intervention helps me better understand his position, and I’m … Read more »
I almost wrote into my post earlier today that while I agreed with Steve’s point that Boumediene remained consequential, I suspected he would not agree with the one I was making. I refrained, but it turned out I was right. … Read more »
I’m pleased to see that Ben largely agrees with my reaction to the Guantanamo cert. denials. But Ben goes on to rehash a point he has made before about the meaning of “meaningful” habeas review–and with which I rather vehemently … Read more »
The Supreme Court has reversed the Ninth Circuit in al-Kidd v. Ashcroft, a Bivens action in which the plaintiff alleges (among other things) that then-Attorney General John Ashcroft violated the Fourth Amendment by directing prosecutors to use the material … Read more »
Today the Supreme Court denied cert. to the five Uighur detainees held at Guantanamo. The Uighurs had asked the Court to determine that a federal judge who has granted a detainee’s habeas petition also has the judicial power to direct … Read more »
In fulfillment of my promise last week to provide analysis of the various pieces of new Senate legislation, here are some thoughts on the new version of Senator Lindsey Graham’s habeas reform bill. The bill is largely a reintroduction … Read more »
More than two years ago, in my book Law and the Long War: The Future of Justice in the Age of Terror, I wrote the following paragraph about the value of habeas review to innocent detainees:
Indeed, [my] critique
Peter Margulies, author of Law’s Detour: Justice Displaced in the Bush Administration, who previously offered these comments on S. 3707 and future dangerousness weighs in on the bill’s transfer provisions as well. He largely defends the provision but suggests … Read more »
Monday, May 20, 2013
As Jack posted yesterday—and as everyone is buzzing about—President Obama will give a major counterterrorism speech on Thursday at the National Defense University. The Wall Street Journal, CNN, and Politico all report on the talk, and subjects that the President will likely address.
Speaking of Jack, he noted another of today’s big stories: the Washington Post’s piece on the FBI’s search, a few years… Read more »
