Search for: "Ex Parte Quirin"
Results 81 - 100
of 127
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Jan 2013, 5:48 am
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 Dec 2012, 6:33 am
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]
12 Nov 2012, 5:20 am
Bush relied primarily on the Supreme Court's decision in Ex parte Quirin (1942). [read post]
18 Jul 2012, 12:12 am
Although there were differences between them, these played no part in her conclusions on liability overall. [read post]
17 May 2012, 6:23 am
Each of the offenses at issue has a direct antecedent in “the system of common law applied by [this nation’s] military tribunals,” Ex parte Quirin, 317 U.S. 1, 30 (1942), and incorporated into military regulations at least since the Civil War. [read post]
4 May 2012, 10:21 am
In that sense, the government’s view – that material support is part of a domestic, “U.S. common law of war” – is both radical and unsound. [read post]
2 May 2012, 6:29 pm
During debates on the MCA, Senator Graham had intimated that Hamdan’s trial by military tribunal was akin to a U.S. service member being tried by for a federal crime not otherwise part of the UCMJ pursuant to the Assimilative Crimes Act. [read post]
20 Apr 2012, 5:41 am
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]
20 Apr 2012, 5:41 am
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]
25 Mar 2012, 8:46 pm
First, the plurality noted that the Court in Ex parte Quirin, 317 U.S. 1 (1942), did not affirmatively decide whether conspiracy to violate the law of war was itself a violation of the law of war triable by law-of-war military commission, thus negating the case’s precedential value. [read post]
6 Mar 2012, 9:19 am
He began by asserting, as the Supreme Court found in ex parte Quirin, that citizenship did not protect a US national from the consequences of his belligerency. [read post]
22 Feb 2012, 1:30 pm
I also benefit from working with a number of Yale law students as part of my office’s internship and externship programs. [read post]
2 Feb 2012, 6:52 am
– Law), The Court’s Fateful Error in Ex parte Quirin, the Nazi Saboteur CaseApril 20, 2012: David Golove (New York Univ. [read post]
17 Jan 2012, 5:28 pm
Instead, as Chief Justice Stone explained in Ex parte Quirin (my emphasis), An express exception from Article III, § 2, and from the Fifth and Sixth Amendments, of trials of petty offenses and of criminal contempts has not been found necessary in order to preserve the traditional practice of trying those offenses without a jury. [read post]
5 Jan 2012, 9:31 am
In a case heard during World War II, Ex parte Quirin, the Supreme Court upheld the executive’s right to hold a dual US-German national, Herbert Hans Haupt, as an enemy combatant. [read post]
18 Dec 2011, 6:18 pm
In the case of the German U-boat saboteurs, as the Supreme Court considered their habeas petitions in Ex parte Quirin, FDR quietly let it be known that they were going to be shot regardless. [read post]
2 Dec 2011, 1:04 pm
”; Commentator: Peggy McGuinness Andrew Kent, “The Court’s Fateful Error in Ex parte Quirin, the Nazi Saboteur Case”; Commentator: Steve Vladeck Wayne Sandholz, “Treaties, Constitutions, Courts, and Human Rights”; Commentator: Chris Whytock We welcome you to join us at BYU and at future interest group meetings. [read post]
23 Nov 2011, 6:43 am
"; Commentator: Peggy McGuinnessAndrew Kent, "The Court's Fateful Error in Ex parte Quirin, the Nazi Saboteur Case"; Commentator: Steve VladeckWayne Sandholz, "Treaties, Constitutions, Courts, and Human Rights"; Commentator: Chris Whytock [read post]
25 Oct 2011, 7:37 pm
Noting that the Supreme Court had granted a cause of action in Bivens in part because there were “no special factors counseling hesitation in the absence of affirmative action by Congress,” Judge Gergel analyzed Bivens‘s progeny, noting that the Supreme Court has increasingly resisted the expansion of the Bivens remedy beyond the early Bivens cases, “generally finding present ‘special factors counseling hesitation. [read post]
24 Oct 2011, 1:11 pm
But such mid-conflict prosecutions do have a historical pedigree; Ex parte Quirin concerned a mid-conflict prosecution, and the Civil War era saw many commission proceedings prior to Antietam (though many of these, if not most, did not involve Confederate soldiers accused of war crimes). [read post]
