Earlier this week, two eminent scholars contended that there were no legal grounds for strikes on Syria. Here’s another view.
Latest in International Law
Did the IDF respond appropriately under international law to Palestinian demonstrators along the Gaza border?
Legitimacy and lawfulness in armed conflict have always been intertwined in a delicate dance. The recent U.S. and allied strikes in Syria, however, are introducing a dangerous new step.
What debates about the meaning and efficacy of the U.N. Charter might tell us about international law—and constitutional law.
When the United States uses military force, especially under controversial circumstances, it should explain the legal basis for its actions.
Airstrikes raise serious legal and practical concerns.
After Prime Minister Theresa May referred to “unlawful use of force” in her speech concerning the poisoning of Sergei Skripal, it is worth clarifying the possible role of NATO and the range of potential British actions.
Japan’s views on the legality of a “bloody nose” strike on North Korea are complicated.
The international law of self-defense as it applies to a potential strike on North Korea explained.
On behalf of the University of Texas-Austin’s Strauss Center for International Security and Law, the AALS Section on National Security Law, and Ohio Northern University’s Pettit College of Law, I am pleased to announce that Rebecca Ingber of BU and Shirin Sinnar of Stanford are co-winners of the new