Latest in AUMF

AUMF: Legislative Reaffirmation

Would the Corker-Kaine AUMF Authorize Military Strikes in Iran? A Response to Bobby Chesney

In a Lawfare post on April 25, Bobby Chesney criticizes a New York Times editorial that opined that the Corker-Kaine AUMF could be used to attack Iran or North Korea. Because this part of the editorial linked to my op-ed in Defense One, Chesney focuses on my analysis.

Detention & Guantanamo

Full Audio of Oral Argument in Al-Alwi v. Trump

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit heard oral argument on Tuesday in Al-Alwi v. Trump. The panel was composed of Chief Judge Merrick Garland and Judges Karen Henderson and Thomas Griffith. Sonia M. Carson argued for the government. Ramzi Kassem argued for al-Alwi.

Listen to the full audio of the argument here.

AUMF

The Next Wave of AUMF Expansion? The Islamic State’s Global Affiliates

The 2001 authorization for the use of military force (AUMF) authorizes the president to use force against “those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons.” But presidents have steadily interpreted the

AUMF

Smith v. Trump In the D.C. Circuit: A Guided Tour of the Oral Argument

Together with David Remes, I presented Capt. Nathan Smith's challenge to the war against the Islamic State before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals on Oct. 27. Judge Thomas Griffith presided, with Judges David Sentelle and Raymond Randolph, joining in a wide-ranging discussion of doctrine and cases that touched on many national security law problems. While the court had officially granted 15 minutes to each side, the hearing lasted for more than an hour. The court has provided a recording of the argument.

Subscribe to Lawfare

EmailRSSKindle