E-mail:
Jack Balkin: jackbalkin at yahoo.com
Bruce Ackerman bruce.ackerman at yale.edu
Ian Ayres ian.ayres at yale.edu
Corey Brettschneider corey_brettschneider at brown.edu
Mary Dudziak mary.l.dudziak at emory.edu
Joey Fishkin joey.fishkin at gmail.com
Heather Gerken heather.gerken at yale.edu
Abbe Gluck abbe.gluck at yale.edu
Mark Graber mgraber at law.umaryland.edu
Stephen Griffin sgriffin at tulane.edu
Jonathan Hafetz jonathan.hafetz at shu.edu
Jeremy Kessler jkessler at law.columbia.edu
Andrew Koppelman akoppelman at law.northwestern.edu
Marty Lederman msl46 at law.georgetown.edu
Sanford Levinson slevinson at law.utexas.edu
David Luban david.luban at gmail.com
Gerard Magliocca gmaglioc at iupui.edu
Jason Mazzone mazzonej at illinois.edu
Linda McClain lmcclain at bu.edu
John Mikhail mikhail at law.georgetown.edu
Frank Pasquale pasquale.frank at gmail.com
Nate Persily npersily at gmail.com
Michael Stokes Paulsen michaelstokespaulsen at gmail.com
Deborah Pearlstein dpearlst at yu.edu
Rick Pildes rick.pildes at nyu.edu
David Pozen dpozen at law.columbia.edu
Richard Primus raprimus at umich.edu
K. Sabeel Rahmansabeel.rahman at brooklaw.edu
Alice Ristroph alice.ristroph at shu.edu
Neil Siegel siegel at law.duke.edu
David Super david.super at law.georgetown.edu
Brian Tamanaha btamanaha at wulaw.wustl.edu
Nelson Tebbe nelson.tebbe at brooklaw.edu
Mark Tushnet mtushnet at law.harvard.edu
Adam Winkler winkler at ucla.edu
Triple-Threat to Our Security: International Fora, Judicial Processes and Terrorism
Marty Lederman
The Administration has released its official National Defense Strategy. One of the purported "key assumptions" upon which U.S. national defense strategy is based is the following U.S. "vulnerability" (page 5): "Our strength as a nation state will continue to be challenged by those who employ a strategy of the weak using international fora, judicial processes, and terrorism."
Boy, if they're willing to say that in such a prominent public document, one shudders to imagine what they say in private about "international fora" and "judicial processes." More chilling still is this editorial from the Washington Times. The problem, you see, is that the enemy not only knows what our laws are -- it also knows that we "observe the laws of war." Yes, if only we weren't so enamoured of that pesky ol' rule of law, winning wars would be oh so much easier.
This is a theme one increasingly hears as a justification for avoiding all public deliberation about the law of interrogation and torture -- such as discussion of which forms of interrogation are lawful: In theory, torture is forbidden, but Al Qaeda detainees must be made to think that the law is uncertain -- that torture just may be possible -- so that the threat of extreme interrogation techniques is credible (which is said to be the only way to elicit information from these crafty foes). In other words, our law must reamin opaque so that the threat of torture and inhumane treatment remains credible. (Never mind that such threats are themselves unlawful.) Posted
8:38 PM
by Marty Lederman [link]
Comments:
Hi
I just wanna say that I like your Blog a lot. It's very interesting.
Hello... I just wanted to introduce our new stock trading system and training program that is helping people make up to 1% return on investment each week... and sometimes 1% return each day. It all depends.