Garrett Ordower
- Published in print:
- 2018
- Published Online:
- September 2018
- ISBN:
- 9780226529387
- eISBN:
- 9780226529554
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of Chicago Press
- DOI:
- 10.7208/chicago/9780226529554.003.0015
- Subject:
- Law, Human Rights and Immigration
This chapter argues that the vast increase in the U.S. use of military contractors to fight the War on Terror has created the potential for illegality and abuse by U.S. military contractors but ...
More
This chapter argues that the vast increase in the U.S. use of military contractors to fight the War on Terror has created the potential for illegality and abuse by U.S. military contractors but little ability to hold them accountable. Exemplifying this is the difficulty that the U.S. faced in prosecuting Blackwater employees for their massacre of Iraqi civilians in Nisour Square in the course of providing security services for the U.S. State Department. Due to the lack of extraterritorial jurisdiction over the activities of many such contractors, the laws that apply to military personnel, such as the UCMJ and the MEJA, do not provide grounds for criminal or civil actions against contractors in many actual and possible circumstances. This chapter reviews the possibilities for using MEJA, SMTJ, ATS, UCMJ, the Anti-torture Statute, and foreign law against rogue or criminal contractors, and finds holes in the scope of each for securing justice. The chapter goes on to consider some recent proposals, such as the Civil Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Statute (CEJA) and extensions to existing law, to plug the gaps that make it difficult to prosecute or sue contractors for acts such as torture.Less
This chapter argues that the vast increase in the U.S. use of military contractors to fight the War on Terror has created the potential for illegality and abuse by U.S. military contractors but little ability to hold them accountable. Exemplifying this is the difficulty that the U.S. faced in prosecuting Blackwater employees for their massacre of Iraqi civilians in Nisour Square in the course of providing security services for the U.S. State Department. Due to the lack of extraterritorial jurisdiction over the activities of many such contractors, the laws that apply to military personnel, such as the UCMJ and the MEJA, do not provide grounds for criminal or civil actions against contractors in many actual and possible circumstances. This chapter reviews the possibilities for using MEJA, SMTJ, ATS, UCMJ, the Anti-torture Statute, and foreign law against rogue or criminal contractors, and finds holes in the scope of each for securing justice. The chapter goes on to consider some recent proposals, such as the Civil Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Statute (CEJA) and extensions to existing law, to plug the gaps that make it difficult to prosecute or sue contractors for acts such as torture.
Harold Hongju Koh
- Published in print:
- 2018
- Published Online:
- October 2018
- ISBN:
- 9780190912185
- eISBN:
- 9780190912215
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780190912185.003.0003
- Subject:
- Law, Public International Law
This chapter illustrates how the counterstrategies of rope-a-dope and transnational legal process have played out since the start of the Trump Administration. The outside strategy of domestic ...
More
This chapter illustrates how the counterstrategies of rope-a-dope and transnational legal process have played out since the start of the Trump Administration. The outside strategy of domestic litigation has been combined with other forms of external and internal pressure from many stakeholders in a wideranging effort to resist President Donald Trump’s draconian immigration policies, particularly the Travel Ban, or Muslim Ban. The chapter also describes the core strategy of internalized bureaucratic resistance to efforts to reimpose torture as an “enhanced interrogation tactic.” This counterstrategy, which gives meaning to the slogan “This is what democracy looks like,” will likely continue whether or not the Trump Administration successfully defends its immigration policies in the courts.Less
This chapter illustrates how the counterstrategies of rope-a-dope and transnational legal process have played out since the start of the Trump Administration. The outside strategy of domestic litigation has been combined with other forms of external and internal pressure from many stakeholders in a wideranging effort to resist President Donald Trump’s draconian immigration policies, particularly the Travel Ban, or Muslim Ban. The chapter also describes the core strategy of internalized bureaucratic resistance to efforts to reimpose torture as an “enhanced interrogation tactic.” This counterstrategy, which gives meaning to the slogan “This is what democracy looks like,” will likely continue whether or not the Trump Administration successfully defends its immigration policies in the courts.
Charles N. Pede
- Published in print:
- 2015
- Published Online:
- December 2015
- ISBN:
- 9780199328574
- eISBN:
- 9780199363193
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199328574.003.0014
- Subject:
- Law, Public International Law
This chapter outlines the military justice system. In doing so, the chapter explains why the military maintains a separate justice system—regulated by what is often referred to as “military law,” ...
More
This chapter outlines the military justice system. In doing so, the chapter explains why the military maintains a separate justice system—regulated by what is often referred to as “military law,” highlights its novel aspects, and discusses contemporary challenges. Using vignettes and historical examples the chapter begins by outlining the foundations of the system. It then moves into a discussion on the sources of authority for the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the Manual for Courts-Martial, and uses case studies to explain how the system works. The chapter also offers unique insights in practicing military justice in a deployed environment and the importance of maintaining command responsibility over the system. The chapter concludes that, despite ongoing criticism, there remains an overwhelming need for an independent military justice system.Less
This chapter outlines the military justice system. In doing so, the chapter explains why the military maintains a separate justice system—regulated by what is often referred to as “military law,” highlights its novel aspects, and discusses contemporary challenges. Using vignettes and historical examples the chapter begins by outlining the foundations of the system. It then moves into a discussion on the sources of authority for the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the Manual for Courts-Martial, and uses case studies to explain how the system works. The chapter also offers unique insights in practicing military justice in a deployed environment and the importance of maintaining command responsibility over the system. The chapter concludes that, despite ongoing criticism, there remains an overwhelming need for an independent military justice system.
Craig Jones
- Published in print:
- 2020
- Published Online:
- January 2021
- ISBN:
- 9780198842927
- eISBN:
- 9780191878824
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780198842927.003.0002
- Subject:
- Law, Public International Law
This chapter argues that the US-led war in Vietnam (1955–1975) paved the way for institutional changes in the US military, including the establishment of the US Law of War Program, which later ...
More
This chapter argues that the US-led war in Vietnam (1955–1975) paved the way for institutional changes in the US military, including the establishment of the US Law of War Program, which later precipitated the emergence of a new doctrinal approach to the laws of war called ‘operational law’. Military lawyers emerged from the Vietnam War better equipped and with a formal mandate to advise military commanders on the legality of targeting operations. Military lawyers performed a wide range of duties in Vietnam, especially around Prisoner of War (POW) issues, and were deployed in unprecedented numbers. Military lawyers were not involved in targeting, neither during ‘Operation Rolling Thunder’ nor ‘Operation Linebacker’, but the Vietnam War in general and the My Lai massacre of 1968 in particular helped to create the conditions for their involvement in subsequent wars.Less
This chapter argues that the US-led war in Vietnam (1955–1975) paved the way for institutional changes in the US military, including the establishment of the US Law of War Program, which later precipitated the emergence of a new doctrinal approach to the laws of war called ‘operational law’. Military lawyers emerged from the Vietnam War better equipped and with a formal mandate to advise military commanders on the legality of targeting operations. Military lawyers performed a wide range of duties in Vietnam, especially around Prisoner of War (POW) issues, and were deployed in unprecedented numbers. Military lawyers were not involved in targeting, neither during ‘Operation Rolling Thunder’ nor ‘Operation Linebacker’, but the Vietnam War in general and the My Lai massacre of 1968 in particular helped to create the conditions for their involvement in subsequent wars.