Volume 130 - Number 3 - Fall 2015
Is the Pentagon Papers Case Relevant in the Age of WikiLeaks?
Bruce E. Altschuler revisits the Pentagon Papers case to determine its relevance in the internet age. He argues that the emergence of independent leakers with access to the internet has shifted greater responsibility on the mainstream media to practice self-restraint and to decide what to publish. The emergence of independent leakers has also accelerated prosecutions by the Obama administration.
Volume 127 - Number 4 - Winter 2012-2013
Suspension of Law during Crisis
ROSS J. CORBETT analyzes the claim that the response to some emergencies requires a departure from the law. He notes that this claim rests on a particular view of what the law is and is best understood as an argument that emergencies ought to be handled extra-legally. He argues that interrogating this extra-legalist claim reveals another strategy for controlling executive discretion while permitting enough flexibility to preserve the public good.
Volume 127 - Number 2 - Summer 2012
The Demise of the PLO: Neither Diaspora nor Statehood
Hillel Frisch analyzes the demise of the Palestinian Liberation Organization and the withering of the Palestinian diaspora. Unfortunately for the Palestinians, the presumed virtues of globalization in facilitating diaspora are hardly a substitute for a mobilized homeland state, which seems unattainable.
Volume 126 - Number 4 - Winter 2011-12
The Influence of Magna Carta in Limiting Executive Power in the War on Terror
Eric T. Kasper examines the use of Magna Carta by U.S. federal courts in enemy combatant cases. He traces the history of due process, jury trial, and habeas corpus rights within Magna Carta as well as subsequent legal documents and rulings in England and America. He concludes that Magna Carta is properly used by the federal courts as persuasive authority to limit executive power in the war on terror.
Volume 126 - Number 2 - Summer 2011
Judicial Supremacy or Judicial Defense? The Supreme Court and the Separation of Powers
Katy J. Harriger argues that the U.S. Supreme Court's rejection of the George W. Bush administration's policies on the trials of Guantanamo detainees should be understood within the context of separation-of-powers jurisprudence. During this time, the Court has asserted itself as the “referee” of the separation-of-powers system and has consistently defended judicial power, often at the expense of congressional and executive power.
Volume 126 - Number 2 - Summer 2011
The Drug War’s Impact on Executive Power, Judicial Reform, and Federalism in Mexico
Juan D. Lindau examines the impact of the drug war on critical aspects of Mexican democratization, namely the expansion in the scope of certain features of executive power, judicial reform, and the construction of substantive federalism. He concludes that the drug war has increased the power of the least-transparent, least-accountable institutions tied to the executive branch. It has also preserved practices that impinge on civil and human rights, while complicating judicial reform and the deepening of federalism.
Volume 126 - Number 1 - Spring 2011
Nuclear Forensics: False Hopes and Practical Realities
Richard Weitz looks at the international politics of nuclear forensics—a scientific technique that employs various investigatory methods to reveal the source and history of nuclear material. He worries that many governments and analysts underestimate the difficulties in constructing an effective nuclear forensics regime that can pinpoint those responsible for a nuclear incident and thus weakens the ability to deter by threatening nuclear retaliation.
Volume 124 - Number 3 - Fall 2009
Human Rights and Public Opinion: From Attitudes to Action
Shareen Hertel, Lyle Scruggs, and C. Patrick Heidkamp examine original public opinion data on American attitudes regarding human rights and ethical consumption. They find a higher acceptance of economic rights than have previous studies, and a high willingness to pay for ethically produced goods—though with notable variation among demographic groups.
Volume 123 - Number 3 - Fall 2008
When the Men with Guns Rule: Explaining Human Rights Failures in Kosovo since 1999
MARK A. WOLFGRAM discusses the costs of early failures in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the United Nations mission in Kosovo after June 1999. The failure of NATO and the UN to secure basic human rights for Kosovo’s non-Albanian minorities raises serious questions about the future of similar militarized humanitarian interventions.
Volume 122 - Number 1 - Spring 2007
The Detention and Trial of Enemy Combatants: A Drama in Three Branches
Michael C. Dorf describes the interactions among the three branches of the federal government in addressing the detention and trial of captives in the war in Afghanistan and the broader ‘‘war on terror.’’ He explains that the Supreme Court’s repeated rejections of the Bush administration’s sweeping assertions of wartime authority have erected few insurmountable obstacles to administration policy. Instead, the Court has required the administration to seek authority from Congress, which in turn has shown little appetite for reining in the President.