courts

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.

President Arévalo's state of emergency provides him a short window to use the gang crackdown to also crack open the country's structures of impunity.

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

A new ICC policy provides a valuable framework for the investigation of cyber-enabled international crimes.

A deep dive into the Trump administration’s first-year deregulatory agenda, Supreme Court influences, and the evolving limits of agency authority.

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

In Burnley v. United States, relatives sue on behalf of two Trinidadian men killed in a boat strike, confronting U.S. sovereign immunity and the political question doctrine.

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.

An expert guide to analyzing criminal exposure arising from the use—or misuse—of generative artificial intelligence.

Foreign aid cuts have halted most international judicial training. What future paths remain for U.S. judges seeking global engagement?

This article examines how the ICJ and ICC navigate legitimacy challenges in armed conflicts, testing their authority, fairness, and impact on global peace and justice.