Are Abu Ghraib torture victims entitled to compensation? Not one victim of official cruelty in U.S. custody has had access to an enforceable, effective remedy because the government has argued that allowing these claims to be heard would endanger national security.
If bin Laden had been captured and tried in a fair and transparent process, the facts of the case could have been discussed, a historical record created, more information may have emerged and individuals who lost loved ones could have testified.
Because modern piracy is largely an economic crime, and because states appear unable to stop it with any of the political, legal, or military tools, economic actors -- shipping companies -- should be given greater leeway to respond effectively.
Obama's insistence that resolving the conflict over Israel's illegal settlements should be restricted to bilateral negotiations assumes symmetry in power and legality in the two sides that doesn't, in fact, exist.
In the 1870s Christopher Columbus Langdell, Dean of Harvard Law School, introduced a major innovation in legal education: the case method. Nearly a century and a half later, another innovation is afoot.
Thank goodness someone has shown humanitarian concern about the plight of 3,400 Iranians in Camp Ashraf, Iraq. In the face of Iraq's unwillingness to shoulder its international responsibilities, Spain has stepped up to the challenge.
We walked around a field where the ground was literally littered with small holes and flags, marking the dangerous bomblets buried inches beneath the surface. There must have been 50 munitions scattered across a field the size of a basketball court.
In Mexico, not a single soldier responsible for human rights crimes has been held accountable in civilian courts since the United States started delivering hundreds of millions of Merida Initiative dollars.
In Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and other areas where the U.S. routinely kills civilians, the actual killing seems distant. We grow so accustomed to our remote roles that we hardly notice the rising antagonism caused by U.S. aerial attacks.
Burns' piece unilaterally changes the terminology and phraseology connected to one of the major obstacles of the Palestinian-Israeli conflicts. By changing this terminology, Burns has clearly taken a biased stand.