Search for: "Ex Parte Quirin" Results 1 - 20 of 110
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 Jan 2013, 5:48 am by Kenneth Anderson
Professor Kent will be guest-posting about the article, so the Readings post will be brief, but we wanted to flag this interesting and provocative analysis of Ex Parte Quirin. [read post]
20 Jun 2016, 6:02 pm by CrimProf BlogEditor
Davies (George Mason University School of Law) has posted Some Clerical Contributions to Ex Parte Quirin (Green Bag 2d, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 283-325 (2016)) on SSRN. [read post]
20 Dec 2012, 6:33 am by Dan Ernst
Andrew Kent, Fordham University School of Law, has posted Judicial Review for Enemy Fighters: The Court's Fateful Turn in Ex Parte Quirin, the Nazi Saboteur Case, which will appear in Vanderbilt Law Review 66 (2013); 101. [read post]
4 Jan 2013, 8:00 am by Benjamin Wittes
Andrew Kent writes in with the following guest post on his fascinating new article on Ex Parte Quirin. [read post]
29 Jul 2020, 4:00 am by Josh Blackman
7/29/1942: Supreme Court hears oral argument in Ex Parte Quirin. [read post]
29 Oct 2019, 4:00 am by Josh Blackman
10/29/1942: Published decision in Ex Parte Quirin released. [read post]
29 Oct 2020, 4:00 am by Josh Blackman
10/29/1942: Published decision in Ex Parte Quirin released. [read post]
1 Aug 2020, 4:00 am by Josh Blackman
The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of these trials in Ex Parte Quirin. [read post]
13 Jun 2016, 9:30 pm by Dan Ernst
  This article introduces some documents relating to Ex parte Quirin and then explains where they have been for the last 70-plus years. [read post]
23 Oct 2014, 6:33 am by Peter Margulies
  The Court’s landmark decision in Ex Parte Milligan dovetails with Quirin. [read post]
22 Oct 2014, 4:24 pm by Wells Bennett
In this little read-out, I’ll make this lone observation (one I see Steve also mentioned too, over at Just Security): with his questions to both parties today, Judge David Tatel demonstrated keen sensitivity to a key precedent, Ex Parte Quirin. [read post]
31 May 2017, 9:09 am by Robert Chesney, Steve Vladeck
 The explain what that label does and does not refer to, survey the pre-9/11 history (with an emphasis on key Supreme Court decisions like Ex parte Milligan and Ex parte Quirin), identify the key issues raised by the military commission system established after 9/11, track how those issues evolved over time (as the executive branch tinkered with the rules, as the courts weighed in, and as Congress ultimately intervened in 2006 and… [read post]
20 Apr 2012, 5:41 am by Steve Vladeck
See, e.g., Ex parte Quirin, 317 U.S. 1 (1942) (holding that law-of-war military commission convened July 8, 1942 at Washington, D.C. had jurisdiction to try Richard Quirin and seven others); Sec’y of War Henry L. [read post]
23 Jun 2017, 9:30 pm by Karen Tani
Update: The disturbing story of the memorial to the Nazi Saboteurs of Ex parte Quirin, from the Washington Post. [read post]
15 Feb 2010, 5:50 pm by Dwight Sullivan
Included in the “G-Men and Journalists” exhibit was a small display about the 1942 German saboteur operation that resulted in the Supreme Court’s Ex Parte Quirin opinion.  317 U.S. 1 (1942).  [read post]
13 Oct 2014, 4:27 am by Jonathan Hafetz
(For an excellent overview of the issues, see the exchange between Steve Vladeck and Peter Margulies over at Lawfare, starting here and here.In Ex parte Quirin the Supreme Court recognized a limited exception to the constitutional requirement of trying crimes in Article III courts. [read post]
12 Aug 2016, 8:25 am by Quinta Jurecic
Across the span of a century, the Supreme Court has held both that the trial of a noncombatant U.S. citizen by military commission is unconstitutional when civilian courts are still available and operational (in Ex parte Milligan), and that the trial by military commission of a U.S. citizen who is also an unlawful enemy combatant is constitutional (in Ex parte Quirin). [read post]
30 Oct 2020, 9:30 pm by ernst
  The latest, by Winston Bowman, is FF's Soliloquy, from the Supreme Court's deliberations in from Ex parte Quirin. [read post]
18 Aug 2014, 9:59 am by Steve Vladeck
In Ex parte Quirin, the Supreme Court held that Article III does not apply to “offenses committed by enemy belligerents against the law of war,” which is why the war crimes trials after World War II–and the 9/11 trial at Guantánamo–haven’t raised Article III questions. [read post]