Minnesota Law Review

Note, Murder and the Military Commissions: Prohibiting the Executive’s Unauthorized Expansion of Jurisdiction

When Congress passed the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA) to create a military commission system to try detainees held at Guantánamo Bay, it granted the Secretary of Defense the authority to detail the procedural and evidentiary rules. In response, the Secretary promulgated the Manual for Military Commissions (MMC), which, among other things, listed individual elements of each MCA substantive offense. The MMC, however, redefined the MCA offense of Murder in Violation of the Law of War. U.S. military, federal, and international law unanimously state that to murder in violation of the law of war, the victim must be a protected person, who is someone taking no active part in the hostilities. Yet the MMC fails to mention the status of the victim, instead declaring that any act taken by an “unlawful combatant” violates the law of war. Beyond being completely at odds with the established law of war, the MMC’s definition conflates individual elements of the crime and drastically expands the limited jurisdiction of the military commissions.

This Note argues that the Secretary of Defense acted without statutory or constitutional authority to redefine the law of war. Although the Obama Administration will not try detainees at Guantánamo, this Note contends that in any future law-of-war prosecutions, judges must require juries to find that the accused actually violated the established law of war. More fundamentally, the Obama Administration should not sustain the Secretary’s unauthorized actions. President Obama should issue an executive order reaffirming the government’s commitment to the international law of war and the administration must scrutinize MCA crimes and MMC definitions before transposing them to future prosecutions. The executive branch has no constitutional authority to redefine the law of war and continuing to apply the MMC’s interpretation would impermissibly expand the limited jurisdiction of any law-of-war tribunal.

:: View PDF

News & Events

  • Fall Submissions Open – Headnotes

    The Minnesota Law Review: Headnotes fall submissions period is open. For more information, please visit our submissions page. Share this: on Twitter on Facebook on Google+

  • Vol. 97 Piece Quoted in Mother Jones Article

    A recent Mother Jones article predicting how the Roberts Court would resolve King v. Burwell draws on How Business Fares in the Supreme Court from Volume 97. You can read the article here. Share this: on Twitter on Facebook on Google+

  • Welcome to De Novo

    For nearly one hundred years, the Minnesota Law Review has been a leader amongst academic legal publications. When Professor Henry J. Fletcher launched the journal in 1917, his goal was simple. It was to “contribute a little something to the systematic growth of the whole law.” Since then, the Law [...]

  • Minnesota Law Review Alum Remembered 45 Years After Death

    Minnesota Law Review alumnus Tom Cranna was honored at the Annual Banquet this Spring, 45 years after his death. Mr. Cranna was remembered for his contributions to the journal, the school, and the positive impact he had on his family and friends. The Devil’s Lake Journal published a memorial which [...]

  • Follow MLR on Twitter!

    The Minnesota Law Review is proud to announce that we are now on Twitter. Follow us @MinnesotaLawRev for information and updates concerning the petition period and deadlines, the opening and closing of article submissions, our 2014 Symposium: Offenders in the Community, and all other news concerning our authors and publications. [...]


cforms contact form by delicious:days