MENU

Terrorism

The Legal and Policy Implications of Closing Guantánamo Bay - Podcast

International & National Security Law Practice Group Podcast
John O'Quinn, Stephen I. Vladeck June 11, 2014

Guantanamo BayWould relocation of War on Terror detainees currently held at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba into the United States result in detainees’ possible eligibility for removal from the U.S. under any grounds, or give to those detainees additional U.S. constitutional rights they do not currently possess? Would their relocation result in a new spate of litigation designed to assert such claims, even if those claims are not ultimately successful? As a policy matter, is relocation a good idea? Our experts discussed these and other questions, many of which are also addressed in the May 14, 2014, Department of Justice report, linked here.

  • John C. O'Quinn, Partner, Kirkland & Ellis LLP
  • Prof. Stephen I. Vladeck, Associate Dean for Scholarship, American University Washington College of Law

Keynote Address by Michael Mukasey - Event Audio/Video

2014 Annual Student Symposium
Michael B. Mukasey, Steven J. Willis March 25, 2014

Michael MukaseyFormer United States Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey delivered the Keynote Address at the Federalist Society's 2014 Annual Student Symposium at the University of Florida Levin College of Law on March 8, 2014.

Banquet
7:00 – 10:00 p.m.
J. Wayne Reitz Union – Grand Ballroom

Keynote Address

  • Hon. Michael B. Mukasey, 81st Attorney General of the United States
  • Introduction: Prof. Steven J. Willis, Professor of Law, University of Florida Levin College of Law

University of Florida Levin College of Law
Gainesville, FL

[Watch or listen now!]

Drones and Presidential Authority - Event Audio/Video

2014 Annual Student Symposium
Rosa Brooks, Martin Flaherty, Gregory G. Katsas, Michael S. Paulsen, Eileen O'Connor March 25, 2014

Drones and Presidential Authority - Event Audio/VideoA key element of America’s national security strategy has been the use of drones to carry out targeted killings against suspected terrorists. Targeted killings have become increasingly controversial, critics argue that the strikes violate the sovereignty of the nations where the attacks occur, and when those strikes occur outside circumstances of armed conflict amount to extrajudicial killings in violation of international human rights law. The U.S. contends that the strikes are part of America’s armed conflict with al Qaeda, and therefore are lawful strategies pursued pursuant to that armed conflict. Under what circumstances does the President have the authority to order the killing of suspected terrorists? Does he require statutory authorization, such as an Authorization for Use of Military Force, or can he rely on his own inherent power? Is the President bound to abide by treaties and customary international law prohibitions on the use of force? What due process rights are U.S. citizens entitled to when the President chooses to use military force against them? May the President use force against suspected terrorists inside the U.S.?

The University of Florida Student Chapter hosted this panel discussion during the 2014 Annual Student Symposium on Saturday, March 8, 2014.

Panel 3: “DRONES AND PRESIDENTIAL AUTHORITY”
3:45 – 5:30 p.m.
J. Wayne Reitz Union

  • Prof. Rosa Brooks, Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center
  • Prof. Martin Flaherty, Leitner Family Professor of Law, Fordham University School of Law
  • Mr. Gregory Katsas, Partner, Jones Day
  • Prof. Michael Stokes Paulsen, Distinguished University Chair and Professor, University of St. Thomas School of Law
  • Moderator: Hon. Eileen J. O'Connor, Partner, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

University of Florida Levin College of Law
Gainesville, FL

[Watch or listen now!]

Detained Suspected Terrorists: Try in Military Courts or Civilian Courts? - Event Audio/Video

2014 Annual Student Symposium
Laura Donohue, Christopher Jenks, Peter S. Margulies, Deborah Pearlstein, A. Raymond Randolph March 25, 2014

Detained Suspected Terrorists: Try in Military Courts or Civilian Courts? - Event Audio/VideoThis panel will address the ongoing debate regarding trying, convicting and punishing suspected terrorists. Should military tribunals be abandoned in favor of trying individuals in Article III courts? A mere seven individuals held in Guantanamo Bay have been tried and convicted by military commissions, while DOJ reports that more than 500 individuals have been convicted of terrorism related offenses. What has prevented the trial of suspected terrorists held in Guantanamo Bay? Should military commissions for suspected terrorists and other enemies be abandoned or do they serve a valuable function?

The University of Florida Student Chapter hosted this panel discussion during the 2014 Annual Student Symposium on Saturday, March 8, 2014.

Panel 2: “DETAINED SUSPECTED TERRORISTS: TRY IN MILITARY COURTS OR CIVILIAN COURTS?”
1:45 – 3:30 p.m.
J. Wayne Reitz Union

  • Prof. Laura Donohue, Professor of Law Georgetown University Law Center
  • Prof. Christopher Jenks, Director of the Criminal Justice Clinic and Assistant Professor of Law, Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law
  • Prof. Peter S. Margulies, Professor of Law, Roger Williams University School of Law
  • Prof. Deborah Pearlstein, Assistant Professor of Law, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law
  • Moderator: Hon. A. Raymond Randolph, U.S. Court of Appeals, DC Circuit

University of Florida Levin College of Law
Gainesville, FL

[Watch or listen now!]