Volume 11

Main Articles, Volume 11

Bilateral Defense-Related Treaties and the Dilemma Posed by the Law of Neutrality

Jeremy K. Davis[*] [Full text of this Article in PDF is available at this link] I.   Introduction In the early morning hours of January 3, 2020, an American MQ-9 Reaper drone fired several missiles into a motor vehicle convoy leaving Baghdad International Airport.[1] Among those killed in the U.S. attack was Major General Qassim Soleimani, Iran’s top security and intelligence commander and the leader of the powerful Qods Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.[2] U.S. President Donald Trump directed the drone strike in response to “an escalating series of armed attacks in recent months by the Islamic Republic of Iran […]

Main Articles, Volume 11

Unnamed & Uncharged: Next Friend Standing and the Anonymous Detainee

Scott Harman-Heath[*] [Full text of this Article in PDF is available at this link] Introduction For nearly three months beginning in September 2017, the United States detained a U.S. citizen “unnamed, uncharged, and, despite his request, without access to counsel.”[1] The government asserted that John Doe was detained as an enemy combatant in Iraq and that no party had Article III standing to seek judicial review of Doe’s detention.[2] The American Civil Liberties Union (“ACLU”) contested the legality of Doe’s ongoing detention by seeking a writ of habeas corpus on Doe’s behalf, pursuant to a doctrinal exception called “next friend standing.”[3] The

Main Articles, Volume 11

Defending Against the Military: The Posse Comitatus Act’s Exclusionary Rule

Anthony J. Ghiotto[*] [Full text of this Article in PDF is available at this link] Introduction On March 10, 2009, Michael McClendon shot and killed his mother in their hometown of Kinston, Alabama.[1] He then travelled to Samson, Alabama, where he shot and killed five additional family members.[2] McClendon then fled in his vehicle, continuing to shoot other motorists and innocent bystanders all while leading police on a twenty-four mile chase throughout rural Alabama.[3] The chase ended in a police shootout and resulted in McClendon committing suicide.[4] In total, McClendon’s shooting spree resulted in ten deaths and lasted less than one

Main Articles, Volume 11

Examining the Anomalies, Explaining the Value: Should the USA FREEDOM Act’s Metadata Program be Extended?

Susan Landau & Asaf Lubin[*] [Full text of this Article in PDF is available at this link] Introduction The first of Edward Snowden’s disclosures was a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (“FISC”) order requiring that Verizon provide the National Security Agency (“NSA”) with daily Call Detail Records (“CDRs”) for all communications to, from, or within the United States.[1] The order, based on a FISC interpretation of Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001, required Verizon to release all call routing information, including session identifying information (e.g., originating and terminating telephone number, International Mobile Subscriber Identity (“IMSI”) number, International Mobile station

Main Articles, Volume 11

Defense and Deference: Empirically Assessing Judicial Review of Freedom of Information Act’s National Security Exemption

Paulina Perlin[*] [Full text of this Article in PDF is available at this link] Introduction In 1981, the Washington Post submitted a request to the Department of Defense under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”)[1] for “information concerning the failed attempt in April, 1980, to rescue American hostages held in the United States embassy in Teheran.”[2] Invoking FOIA’s exemption for classified records,[3] the Department of Defense “withheld or partially withheld numerous documents . . . in large part due to concern for the national security.”[4] In accordance with FOIA’s judicial review provision,[5] the Washington Post challenged these nondisclosures in court. Given

Main Articles, Volume 11

First Amendment Sentence Mitigation: Beyond a Public Accountability Defense for Whistleblowers

Mailyn Fidler[*] [Full text of this Article in PDF is available at this link] Introduction In October 2018, the federal district court in Minnesota sentenced former Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) agent Terry James Albury to four years in prison under the Espionage Act for disclosing internal FBI documents to the press.[1] Albury pleaded guilty but contended he was a whistleblower acting in the public interest; he argued he had disclosed systemic racial biases within the FBI and throughout its investigations.[2] At sentencing, Albury’s lawyers argued that his motives mattered: “[C]ontrary to the government’s claims, Mr. Albury’s motivation for his

Scroll to Top