Latest in International Law
What would Hart and Locke say about how documents like the U.S. Constitution or the U.N. Charter remain law?
What causes international law’s institutional deficit?
Earlier this week, two eminent scholars contended that there were no legal grounds for strikes on Syria. Here’s another view.
Did the IDF respond appropriately under international law to Palestinian demonstrators along the Gaza border?
Legitimacy and lawfulness in armed conflict have always been intertwined in a delicate dance. The recent U.S. and allied strikes in Syria, however, are introducing a dangerous new step.
What debates about the meaning and efficacy of the U.N. Charter might tell us about international law—and constitutional law.
When the United States uses military force, especially under controversial circumstances, it should explain the legal basis for its actions.
Airstrikes raise serious legal and practical concerns.
After Prime Minister Theresa May referred to “unlawful use of force” in her speech concerning the poisoning of Sergei Skripal, it is worth clarifying the possible role of NATO and the range of potential British actions.
Japan’s views on the legality of a “bloody nose” strike on North Korea are complicated.