Balkinization has a first take on what seems to be the language the Senate enacted today as a “compromise” on the Graham amendment.
It does not look at all good.
Balkinization has a first take on what seems to be the language the Senate enacted today as a “compromise” on the Graham amendment.
It does not look at all good.
Man, everybody knows that “voluntary” means approximately nothing. Does anybody actually voluntarily reduce their carbon emissions, for example?
Someone should suggest to the Graham/Grim bros. that they read the thoughtful opinion in U.S. v. Noriega, 808 F.Supp 791 (S.D. Fl. 1992)[Yes, THAT “General Noriega”] for some good advice:
● Geneva III [the POW Convention] is self-executing and provides General Noriega with a right of action in a U.S. court for violation of its provisions; Id., at 794
● That it was not a function of neutral third parties to determine POW status, id., at 796;
● That it was a competent tribunal under international law to make the POW determination regarding General Noriega; Id.,and finally
● That General Noriega was in fact a prisoner of war as defined by Geneva III. . . . Id.
Strangely, the government did NOT appeal, and Noriega rots in jail today, but as a POW under international law!
But the judge in that case offered the following:
“[T]hose charged with that determination [Noriegas confinement location and status] must keep in mind the importance to our own troops of faithful and, indeed, liberal adherence to the mandates of Geneva III. Regardless of how the government views this Defendant as a person, the implications of a failure to adhere to the Convention are too great to justify departures.
In the turbulent course of international events . . . the relatively obscure issues in this case may seem unimportant. They are not. The implications of a less-than-strict adherence to Geneva III are serious and must temper any consideration of the questions presented.” 808 F.Supp at 803. [Emphasis added].
Another one of those damn liberal activist judges….. not!