The international response to acts of maritime piracy around Somalia requires a credible foundation in international law. Naval patrols from nearly every world power lack accurate and well-reasoned jurisdictional mandates necessary to carry out their duties effectively. They want for this essential legal complement because their states fail to thoroughly asses the relevant international laws that ought to guide such conduct. After the lives lost and the millions spent to recover surviving hostages, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea will be the most significant victim of this oversight. Its articles on piracy and supporting commentary prohibit the exercise of jurisdiction over suspected pirates by any state other than that which apprehends them. Yet capturing naval ships transfer suspects to other states as a matter of standard practice, and undermine the convention’s status as a codification of customary international law in doing so. The Note reasons that transfers of suspected pirates are legally permissible, but should not remain the default practice. It argues for a comprehensive assessment of the legal forces that factor in the piracy problem, and for revision of the convention in order to facilitate an effective front-line response to the pirate scourge.
Case Comment: Bhogaita v. Altamonte
EVERY DOG CAN HAVE HIS DAY IN COURT: THE USE OF ANIMALS AS DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBITS Kyle R. Kroll, Volume 100, Online Managing Editor In Bhogaita v. Altamonte, the Eleventh Circuit recently decided whether to allow a dog in the courtroom as a demonstrative exhibit. Although the case presented many serious [...]
Revisiting Water Bankruptcy
REVISITING WATER BANKRUPTCY IN CALIFORNIA’S FOURTH YEAR OF DROUGHT Olivia Moe, Volume 100, Managing Editor This spring, as “extreme” to “exceptional” drought stretched across most of California—indicating that a four-year streak of drought was not about to resolve itself—Governor Jerry Brown issued an unprecedented order to reduce potable urban water [...]
Defying Auer Deference
DEFYING AUER DEFERENCE: SKIDMORE AS A SOLUTION TO CONSERVATIVE CONCERNS IN PEREZ v. MORTGAGE BANKERS ASSOCIATION Nicholas R. Bednar, Volume 100, Lead Articles Editor* On March 9, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States handed down its decision in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association.F The Court overturned the D.C. [...]