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

  • 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. [...]

  • Vol. 97 Lead Piece Cited in Al Jazeera Opinion Piece

    A recent Al Jazeera opinion piece that criticizes the Supreme Court’s Daimler decision cites to Volume 97′s lead piece, How Business Fares in the Supreme Court. You can read the Al Jazeera piece here.

  • Masthead for Volume 99 Board

    The masthead for the Board of Volume 99 of the Minnesota Law Review is now available. You can view the masthead here.

  • Above the Law Post Highlights MLR‘s Jump in Journal Rankings

    A recent post on Above the Law highlights the fact that the Minnesota Law Review was ranked 11th in the most recent 2013 edition of the Washington & Lee Law Review Rankings. You can read the post here.

  • Vol. 97 Lead Piece Cited on Slate

    A recent Slate article on the Supreme Court’s decision not to hear the “Moldy Washing Machine” cases, or overturn class certification of those cases in some circuits, cites to the Volume 97 Lead Piece, How Business Fares in the Supreme Court. You can read the article here.

Newsletter

cforms contact form by delicious:days