Khanna told me that he was discussing next steps with Massie and others on the oversight committee, which may include contempt of Congress or articles of impeachment for Bondi and Blanche.
“We’re exploring all options—including impeachment,” Khanna said. “They’re delusional if they think this is going to go away.”
(…)
I explain what is missing and what the survivors and their lawyers are still expecting to be released.
(3) DECLASSIFICATION TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT POSSIBLE.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—The Attorney General shall declassify, to the maximum extent possible, any information that the Attorney General would otherwise withhold or redact as classified information under this section.
(B) UNCLASSIFIED SUMMARY.—If the Attorney General determines that information described in subparagraph (A) may not be declassified and made available in a manner that protects the national security of the United States, including methods or sources related to national security, the Attorney General shall make publicly available an unclassified summary of the information.
In a letter to Congress Friday describing the release, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said that the Justice Department believes it can black out information, even when it falls outside of the legally mandated redactions for protecting victims, showing gruesome injury or abuse, exposing personal information, or jeopardizing ongoing investigations and national security.
(December 5, 2025)
“Intercepting purported drug boats is a law enforcement operation, subject to policing standards derived from international human rights law, which holds that all people have the rights to life and a fair trial and only allows states to use lethal force when an imminent threat to life exists and less extreme means, like capture, are insufficient.
“A state intentionally killing someone outside those circumstances is committing an extrajudicial execution, a form of murder, no matter what crime the person is alleged to have committed.”
Human rights organization Amnesty International is cautioning critics of the Trump administration’s boat-bombing spree against getting bogged down in the precise details of each individual strike if it means losing sight of the bigger picture.
Daphne Eviatar, director for security and human rights for Amnesty International USA, said on Friday that it would be a mistake to merely condemn the Trump administration for launching a double-tap strike aimed at killing shipwrecked survivors of an initial attack, because the entire campaign of bombing vessels based on the suspicion that they are carrying illegal narcotics is unlawful.
In a legal defense provided to Congress, Trump told lawmakers that the U.S. is in an „armed conflict“ with the cartels and that drug smugglers are „unarmed combatants.“
Some legal experts have said such an argument is unlikely to hold up in court. However, it was unclear who would challenge Trump’s rationale in defense of the drug cartels, with few lawmakers speaking out against it and Trump continuing to expand military operations in the region in recent weeks.
This post does not focus on assessing the substantive grounds which can be relied on to challenge the lawfulness of Yvette Cooper’s decision-making in seeking to proscribe Palestine Action. Instead, it focuses on the constitutional implications of the decision to proscribe Palestine Action. In short, I argue that the Home Secretary’s decision collapses the distinction between violence against the person and violence against property. This represents a seismic break with constitutional norms regarding how the state regulates the fundamental rights to freedom of thought and conscience, freedom of expression, and the right to freedom of assembly. The decision is a chilling example of executive power being wielded to coercively constrain personal and collective liberties in the UK.
Throughout the evening, lawmakers quashed an unprecedented 71,023 objections filed by the opposition before finally voting 67-1 in favor of the legislation in the third and final reading, passing it into law.
In a fascist speech, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pushed back against his critics, insisting that the real danger, he claimed, is an unelected “deep state” working against the elected government.
(March 26, 2025)
The Judicial Selection Committee’s makeup since 1953 has included nine members – three High Court judges, two ministers, two members of Knesset (traditionally one coalition and one opposition), and two representatives of the Israel Bar Association (IBA). According to the new proposal, which will apply beginning with the next Knesset, the two IBA members will be replaced by two “public representatives”, one appointed by the coalition and the other by the opposition.
(March 19, 2025)
After Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu tweets an attack on the “leftist deep state’s weapon[ization] of the justice system[s]” in the US and Israel, President Isaac Herzog’s office quickly posts a rebuttal.
“Israel’s strong and independent judicial system is an asset to our democracy, and the president of Israel is very proud of it,” Herzog’s office tweets.
(February 7, 2025)
Dear Secretary Noem, Secretary Hegseth, and Secretary Rubio:
We write on behalf of the undersigned immigrants‘ rights and civil rights organizations to request immediate access to the noncitizens transferred from immigration detention facilities in the United States and currently detained at the U.S. Naval Base at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.
Since February 4, 2025, the government has transferred nearly two dozen noncitizens to Guantánamo, without providing any information about their circumstances or the government’s legal authority for these unprecedented actions. The government has also announced that it is planning to send tens of thousands of additional immigration detainees to Guantánamo in the near future.
The Constitution, and federal and international law prohibit the government from using Guantánamo as a legal black hole. We therefore request that the government provide our organizations access to the noncitizens detained at Guantánamo so that those individuals will have access to legal counsel, and so advocates and the public can understand the conditions
under which the government is detaining them. We also request basic information that the public has a right to know regarding the noncitizens being sent to Guantánamo and the government’s plans for them.
(…)
Sincerely,
American Civil Liberties Union
Americans for Immigrant Justice
Amica Center
American Gateways
Center for Constitutional Rights
Haitian Bridge Alliance
Human Rights First
International Refugee Assistance Project
Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center
Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights of the SF Bay Area
National Immigrant Justice Center
National Immigration Law Center
Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services
Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights
Texas Civil Rights Project
In the weeks since Donald Trump returned to office, Democrats and legal scholars have warned that he’s provoking a constitutional crisis by trying to expand his power and ignore laws that stand in his way.
On Wednesday, the White House had a new response to that. It’s not the president who is causing the problem, said press secretary Karoline Leavitt, it’s the judges who are blocking some of his agenda by saying it’s illegal.
(February 10, 2025)
In the last 21 days, more than a dozen lawsuits have been filed alleging that the administration’s actions violate the rule of law and are contrary to the Constitution or laws of the United States. The list grows longer every day.
These actions have forced affected parties to seek relief in the courts, which stand as a bulwark against these violations. We support our courts who are treating these cases with the urgency they require. Americans know there is a right way and a wrong way to proceed. What is being done is not the right way to pursue the change that is sought in our system of government.
These actions do not make America stronger. They make us weaker.
(February 10, 2025)
Tracking the Trump administration’s failure to follow the judiciary’s orders.
(February 10, 2025)
There is no universally accepted definition of a constitutional crisis, but legal scholars agree about some of its characteristics. It is generally the product of presidential defiance of laws and judicial rulings. It is not binary: It is a slope, not a switch. It can be cumulative, and once one starts, it can get much worse.
In a world order in which the Great Powers and many lesser ones are turning to war and genocide, popular enforcement of international law is one of the few means for protecting ourselves and the world against a cataclysmic plunge into unlimited military destruction.
By virtue of the U.S. Constitution, international law and international treaties are explicitly a part of U.S. law. U.S. Supreme Court Justice and Nuremberg prosecutor Robert Jackson stated, “The very essence of the Nuremberg Charter is that individuals have international duties which transcend national obligations of obedience imposed by the individual state.” So, obligations under international law are also obligations under U.S. law.
WE DECLARE that, with effect from the moment of the termination of the Mandate being tonight, the eve of Sabbath, the 6th Iyar, 5708 (15th May, 1948), until the establishment of the elected, regular authorities of the State in accordance with the Constitution which shall be adopted by the Elected Constituent Assembly not later than the 1st October 1948, the People‘s Council shall act as a Provisional Council of State, and its executive organ, the People‘s Administration, shall be the Provisional Government of the Jewish State, to be called „Israel“.
THE STATE OF ISRAEL will be open for Jewish immigration and for the Ingathering of the Exiles; it will foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; it will be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture; it will safeguard the Holy Places of all religions; and it will be faithful to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.
Less than two weeks after the opening of hearings at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, as part of a petition lodged by South Africa against Israel for alleged „genocide“ in the Gaza Strip, the court is anticipated to deliver in the coming days a ruling on the petitioner‘s request for a provisional order to halt the war.
Although the Palestinian people believe in the justice of their cause and are fully aware of the injustices and crimes committed against them, they still harbour legitimate fears, given their bitter experiences with the international community and the United Nations Security Council. Many of us have doubts about the seriousness of the international community – especially the US – when it comes to ending, or even mitigating, Israel’s crimes against us.
Although the final judgment of the ICJ will likely take years, we hope the court will make a quick decision on a ceasefire. But this hope dulls when we realise that implementing the ruling depends on the Security Council, where the US can veto any resolution against Israel. This has allowed Israel to long behave with impunity and in disregard of the Geneva Conventions.
These are words that any western leader allowing Israel to carry on with mass murder can ill afford to ignore.
The ICJ has agreed to hold a hearing next week to discuss South Africa’s request for an urgent ruling. No hearing at the World Court at the Hague is more pressing. The fate of that endangered species called international justice depends on it.
(Dec 11, 2023)
Legal experts and scholars have been warning since October that U.S. officials could be rendering themselves complicit in war crimes—and genocide—by continuing to arm the Israeli military as it wages indiscriminate war on the Gaza Strip.
Tlaib echoed that warning Monday, noting that the Biden administration has opted to „give weapons to a military that is very publicly and actively committing serious war crimes and crimes against humanity.“
The hearings will be devoted to the Request for the indication of provisional measures contained in South Africa’s Application. In its Request, South Africa asks the Court to indicate provisional measures in order to “protect against further, severe and irreparable harm to the rights of the Palestinian people under the Genocide Convention” and “to ensure Israel’s compliance with its
obligations under the Genocide Convention not to engage in genocide, and to prevent and to punish genocide”.
Schedule for the hearings
Thursday 11 January 2024 10 a.m.-12 noon.: Oral argument (South Africa)
Friday 12 January 2024 10 a.m.-12 noon.: Oral argument (Israel)
Members of the diplomatic corps, the public and the media will find below practical information regarding the organization of the hearings.
„Based on initial information obtained from official sources, the Foreign Ministry has begun [taking] its prompt legal and international measures through the United Nations,“ Amir Abdollahian wrote.
The heart-wrenching terrorist attacks happened as people were marking the fourth anniversary of the assassination of General Soleimani.
Earlier, Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian said the Islamic Republic had started taking „legal measures“ through the United Nations as part of its efforts to ensure accountability for those responsible for the Kerman attacks.
Beyond material progress and architectural marvels that rival ancient wonders, a truly progressive state is marked by its commitment to accountability and justice – a domain where some established democracies have faltered.
After enduring a harrowing 85 days of bombardment resulting in nearly 22,000 killed, including more than 8,000 children and 6,000 women, 1.9 million displaced and the collapse of the health infrastructure, South Africa, a signatory of the Genocide Convention has finally called upon the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to examine the crisis.
This long-awaited step reflects a crucial recognition of the international community‘s role in conflict resolution and human rights protection.
Der IGH soll laut Statut Konflikte zwischen Staaten möglichst friedlich beilegen. Seine Urteile sind in der Regel bindend. Allerdings besitzen die UN-Richter keine Machtmittel, um einen Staat zur Umsetzung zu zwingen. Sie können aber den UN-Sicherheitsrat aufrufen, in der Sache tätig zu werden.