Introduction

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Tamar Meisels ◽  
Jeremy Waldron
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Targeted Killing ◽  
Short Overview ◽  
Government Power ◽  
Civilian Immunity

The debate over targeted killing in this volume begins with a joint introduction by the authors, briefly setting out the terms of discussion, and presenting a short overview of the practice—what is targeted killing, and how has it been used, in which conflicts, and by whom. Following some historical examples, mostly from Israel and the United States, the authors distinguish between contemporary signature strikes and personality strikes, and focus their forthcoming debate on the latter, i.e., named killing. While this book touches on a wide array of issues, e.g., civilian immunity, drones, violation of sovereignty, abuse of government power, etc., the authors urge the reader early on to maintain a steadfast focus on the essence of targeted killing debated throughout, namely, the targeting for death of named and identified individuals by our states and leaders.

Territoriality and Its Troubles

2020 ◽  
pp. 371-388
Author(s):  
George Rutherglen
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
The United States ◽  
Statutory Interpretation ◽  
Choice Of Law ◽  
Government Power ◽  
Case Count ◽  
Federal Statute

This chapter examines what the presumption against extraterritoriality means and how it operates. The presumption against extraterritoriality itself presumes a set of complicated rules about which features of a transnational case count: which features make a case territorial and within the scope of a federal statute because these features can be located within the United States or, if they cannot, make the case extraterritorial and outside the statute’s scope. The dependence of the presumption upon a network of other rules both complicates its operation and makes it a less than certain guide to statutory interpretation. The chapter then considers the justification for territorial allocation of government power generally, and addresses the question of whether any presumption about the territorial scope of statutes must await a new consensus on the appropriate rules of choice of law. It argues that the presumption against extraterritoriality requires a flexible interpretation that makes it more of a principle than a rule. From that premise, the chapter studies the choice between an ad hoc and a principled application of the presumption, both of which are exemplified in recent decisions.

12. The Governance of Scotland and Wales

2021 ◽  
pp. 318-344
Author(s):  
Ian Loveland
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Government Power ◽  
Geographical Separation ◽  
The Government

This chapter examines how the constitution has addressed the question of the geographical separation of government power in the United Kingdom of England, Scotland, and Wales, and discusses the Scotland Act 1998 and the Government of Wales Acts of 1998 and 2006. It argues that although the Scotland Act 1998 and Government of Wales Act 2006 fall short of creating a ‘federal’ UK constitution similar to how the notion is understood in the United States, the constitutional significance of the devolution legislation should not be underestimated. The chapter also discusses the conduct and outcome of the 2014 independence referendum in Scotland. Consideration is given to the leading Supreme Court judgments on the nature and extent of the Scots Parliament’s legislative powers, and to the contents and implications of the Scotland Act 2016.

Death from Above

The Drone Age ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 55-95
Author(s):  
Michael J. Boyle
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
September 11 ◽  
Al Qaeda ◽  
Targeted Killing ◽  
Conflict Zones ◽  
Physical Risk ◽  
September 11 Attacks

Chapter 3 argues that drones undermine the legal and ethical prohibitions on assassination and extrajudicial violence outside of wartime. It traces the emergence of the practice of targeted killing from its origin to its embrace by the United States after the September 11 attacks. It shows how the United States adopted the use of drones alongside the practice of targeted killing to control risks as it fought a new war against al Qaeda, but found itself gradually drifting into more conflict zones and fighting new enemies. While the United States used drones to protect its pilots from physical risk, it altered the nature of the risks they faced and created new ones for the population who live under the drones. Drones also subtly changed how the United States wages its wars, making it more willing to countenance killing people outside of active battlefields. It concludes by discussing how more countries are now experimenting with targeting killings.

scholarly journals Nursing research education in the United States of America: One approach

Curationis ◽  
1991 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Poggenpoel
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
The United States ◽  
Nursing Research ◽  
Specific Approach ◽  
Research Education ◽  
Short Overview

In addressing nursing research education in the United States of America a short overview of the development of nursing research will be given and then one specific approach to nursing research education will be discussed fully.

scholarly journals Who is to blame for COVID-19? Examining politicized fear and health behavior through a mixed methods study in the United States

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (9) ◽  
pp. e0256136
Author(s):  
Lisa J. Hardy ◽  
Adi Mana ◽  
Leah Mundell ◽  
Moran Neuman ◽  
Sharón Benheim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
United States ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Health Behaviors ◽  
The United States ◽  
Mixed Methods Design ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Health Crisis ◽  
Government Power ◽  
Political Spectrum

Background Political ideologies drove public actions and health behaviors in the first year of the global pandemic. Different ideas about contagion, health behaviors, and the actions of governing bodies impacted the spread of the virus and health and life. Researchers used an immediate, mixed methods design to explore sociocultural responses to the virus and identified differences and similarities in anxiety, fear, blame, and perceptions of nation across political divides. Methods Researchers conducted 60 in-depth, semi-structured interviews and administered over 1,000 questionnaires with people living in the United States. The team analyzed data through an exploratory and confirmatory sequential mixed methods design. Results In the first months of the pandemic interviewees cited economic inequality, untrustworthy corporations and other entities, and the federal government as threats to life and pandemic control. Participants invoked ideas about others to determine blame. Findings reveal heavy associations between lack of safety during a public health crisis and blame of “culture” and government power across the political spectrum. Conclusion Data indicate anxiety across political differences related to ideas of contagion and the maleficence of a powerful elite. Findings on how people understand the nation, politics, and pandemic management contribute to understanding dimensions of health behaviors and underlying connections between anxiety and the uptake of conspiracy theories in public health. The article ends with recommendations drawn from project findings for future pandemic response.

scholarly journals The Commerce Clause From Expansion To Extortion

2011 ◽  
Vol 7 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick J. Reville ◽  
William A. Bottiglieri
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
United States Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Constitution ◽  
Interstate Highway ◽  
Commerce Clause ◽  
Government Power ◽  
Indian Tribes ◽  
Tenth Amendment

The Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution gave the federal government power over foreign trade, trade with the Indian tribes and trade “among several states.”  By lack of further enumeration and the passage of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, it would be reasonable to conclude that commerce that is truly intrastate would, therefore, be within the regulatory province of the states.  In fact, that was the interpretation initially reached and subsequently followed by the United States Supreme Court.  But in 1942, that changed and, over the course of the following 60+ years, to date the Court has concluded, by an expansive interpretation of that federal power granted, that Congress and the federal government have virtually unbridled power to regulate not only those areas that would traditionally be considered “commerce” or “interstate commerce”, but, moreover, in areas that seemingly have nothing to do with commerce, interstate, or otherwise.  This paper will trace the journey that the justices have taken down this judicial interstate highway and the methods that the federal government has employed to achieve its objectives.  Hence, the subtitle of this paper:  From Expansion to Extortion.

Seeing reason or seeing costs? The United States, counterterrorism, and the human rights of foreigners

2021 ◽  
pp. 135406612110631
Author(s):  
Monika Heupel ◽  
Caiden Heaphy ◽  
Janina Heaphy
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
The United States ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Strategic Learning ◽  
Targeted Killing ◽  
Counter Terrorism ◽  
Moral Persuasion ◽  
Mass Surveillance

It is well known that in the wake of 9/11, the United States committed various extraterritorial human rights violations, that is, human rights violations against foreigners outside of its territory. What is less known is that the United States has gradually introduced safeguards that are, at least on paper, meant to prevent its counter-terrorism policies from causing harm to foreigners abroad or, at least, to mitigate such harm. Based on three case studies on the development of safeguards related to torture, targeted killing, and mass surveillance, we show that two mechanisms, coercion and strategic learning, deployed either on their own or in combination, can account for the development of such safeguards. By contrast, we found no evidence of a third mechanism, moral persuasion, having any direct effect. In other words, US policymakers opt to introduce such safeguards either when they face pressure from other states, courts, or civil society that makes immediate action necessary or when they anticipate that not introducing them will, at a later date, result in prohibitively high costs. We did not find evidence of US policymakers establishing safeguards because they deemed them morally appropriate. From this we conclude that, although the emerging norm that states have extraterritorial (and not just domestic) human rights obligations may not have been internalized by key US policymakers, it nevertheless has a regulative effect on them insofar as the fact that relevant others believe in the norm restricts their leeway and influences their cost–benefit calculations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document