Authors:Gabrielle Leeman Abstract: After a white supremacist used his vehicle as a weapon to purposefully attack anti-racism protestors in Charlottesville, Virginia in 2017, federal officials called the incident domestic terrorism. The incident, in fact, met the definition of domestic terrorism. But the perpetrator was not prosecuted under any of the available terrorism statutes. The defendant was instead charged with, and later pled guilty to, committing hate crimes. It is imperative that we recognize all forms of terrorism as terrorism and use the legal system fairly to prosecute all terrorist attacks as terrorism. But the current terrorism statutory framework hinders the ability to prosecute incidents of extreme-right violence as terrorism. This Article argues that many incidents of extreme-right violence are terrorism and should be prosecuted as terrorism. This Article also proposes Congress update the definition of “weapon of mass destruction” to include (1) the use of a vehicle as a weapon and (2) mass shootings. These definitional updates provide a viable path forward for prosecution of violent extreme-right perpetrators as terrorists because it would make available 18 U.S.C. § 2332a, 18 U.S.C. § 2339A, and the terrorism sentencing enhancement. The United States owes it to the victims of such horrific incidents of extreme-right violence to finally prosecute these perpetrators for what they are—terrorists. PubDate: Tue, 01 Mar 2022 13:35:22 PST
Authors:McKinney Voss Wheeler Abstract: Private military contractors (PMCs) are increasingly ubiquitous in international conflicts, providing security, transport services, and even fighting alongside commissioned troops in battle. Yet for the United States, the ambiguity surrounding PMCs’ role in war presents a serious threat to the constitutional balance of war powers. The Founding Fathers deliberately divided those powers between the executive and legislative branches, aware of the dangers of concentrating them too heavily; and Congress further clarified protocol with the War Powers Resolution in 1973. But the War Powers Resolution, which requires the President to notify Congress when engaging "U.S. Armed Forces" in battle, omits any reference to PMCs—a loophole the executive could exploit to take action abroad without Congressional knowledge or approval. Congress must either revise the War Powers Resolution to include PMCs or else pass new legislation regulating their use if it hopes to prevent executive overreach and an increasing reliance on hired guns to fight America's battles. PubDate: Tue, 01 Mar 2022 13:35:15 PST
Open Access journal
[11 journals]
