In the wake of a recent failure to reach international consensus on the application of international law to cyber activities, the United States should seek to shape norms unilaterally by continuing to assertively investigate and indict individuals—including state actors—who engage in cyber activities that the U.S. Government ultimately would like to see the international community characterize as wrongful.
Ashley Deeks joined the University of Virginia Law School in 2012 as an associate professor of law after two years as an academic fellow at Columbia Law School. She served for ten years in the Legal Adviser's Office at the State Department, most recently as the Assistant Legal Adviser for Political-Military Affairs. In 2007-08 she held an International Affairs Fellowship from the Council on Foreign Relations. After graduating from the University of Chicago Law School, she clerked for Judge Edward Becker on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
Subscribe to this Lawfare contributor via RSS.
Contrary to received wisdom about congressional skepticism regarding international law, recent events reveal that Congress is stepping up to embrace it.
Two weeks ago, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued a ruling striking down the FAA’s regulation, though it failed to block an additional notice placing further restrictions on drone flights in the Washington, D.C. area.
The Justice Department is reportedly close to bringing criminal charges against Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks and a longtime resident of the Ecuadorean Embassy in London. But what charges would those be, and how would an extradition request play out?
The Syria intervention is difficult to defend as consistent with international law. The United States has instead begun to make the case that the intervention bears moral legitimacy, using the same kinds of factor-based arguments we saw NATO member states use in Kosovo to defend the legitimacy of their intervention there.
The case of the al Qaeda detainee being held in Yemen demonstrates how foreign actors can play a powerful role in constraining U.S. options.