courts

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.

Judicial involvement in ongoing armed conflicts should be examined from multiple vantage points: courts, victims, parties to conflict, and broader goals of peace and security.

As the ICJ hears Gambia v. Myanmar, the Court should continue to consider “patterns of conduct,” while weighing this evidence with other sources for genocidal intent.

Americans are witnessing a concerted effort to delegitimize legal defense for marginalized or politically disfavored people.

Trump’s attempt to fire FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter without cause forces the Court to revisit Humphrey’s Executor and the future of independent agencies.

Dani Schulkin is joined by Naomi Roht-Arriaza to discuss the warning signs of state capture and grand corruption, and what can be done to push back against it. 

The weakening of the Military Advocate General affects the IDF's ability to carry out its missions lawfully, and the broader protection of the rule of law in Israel.