Brief Amici Curiae on Behalf of International and Constitutional Law Experts in Support of Petition for Certiorari, Al Bahlul v. United States , 840 F.3d 757 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (en banc)

Authors

Robert D. Sloane, Boston University School of LawFollow
Foley Hoag LLP

Document Type

Brief

Publication Date

5-31-2017

Abstract

Amici curiae, legal experts in international and constitutional law, believe that a majority of the en banc panel in Bahlul v. United States, 840 F.3d 757 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (en banc), mistakenly affirmed Ali Hamza Ahmad Suliman al Bahlul’s conviction by a military commission for a non-international war crime. The main concurring opinion in that case misconceived how international law defines the jurisdiction of law-of-war military commissions. As amici argue below, it is the Constitution—not international law—that limits the jurisdiction of lawof-war military commissions.

Recommended Citation

Brief of International and Constitutional Law Experts as Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioner, Al Bahlul v. United States, No. 16-1307 (U.S. May 31, 2017), 2017 WL 2376429.