International Justice

By heeding the warning bells and embracing a do‑no‑harm principle, international courts can denounce abuse while preserving the credibility of international justice.

An analysis of the ICC’s warrants against Putin and Lvova-Belova, exploring their real impact on diplomacy, deterrence, and justice in Ukraine.

Although ICC intervention does appear to deter atrocities, on balance, its involvement in ongoing civil wars fails to facilitate peaceful settlement in most cases.

The relationship between the U.S. and its island territories should concern anyone who believes in the “consent of the governed” and the idea of “all created equal."

As Iranians protested for freedom, the regime intensified its assault on writers and dissenters, silencing key voices like Narges Mohammadi and Ali Asadollahi.

The relationship between international courts and States shapes how they provide accountability, build peace, and respond to backlash.

The new U.N. Cybercrime Convention may create new avenues to hold Russia - and all states parties - accountable at the International Court of Justice.

The Trump administration's withdrawal from dozens of international structures contradicts polls showing Americans broadly support multilateralism, alliances, and human rights.

International courts rarely end wars, but when designed humbly, creatively, and fairly, they can help parties choose law over war—turning justice into a path toward peace.

Three theories by which POW status might attach to a person in Maduro’s position, and the consequences of entitlement to that status.

A new treaty on crimes against humanity will require extensive dialogue and ongoing efforts to engage delegations about the substantive issues.

The Gambia has not shifted the burden of proof in the Gambia v. Myanmar ICJ case; rather, Myanmar faces a tactical choice in its response.