International Law

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

The U.S. effort to withdraw from the WHO presents unique issues of international law—and offers a rare opportunity for an international organization to push back on U.S. exit.

In‑depth legal examination of the U.S. capture of the Russian‑flagged tanker Marinera and its implications under the law of naval warfare.

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.

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

Can the United States join the Board of Peace without action by Congress? Can it provide funds or carry out its operations without congressional approval?

Any acquisition of Greenland by the United States–whether by force or through coerced agreement–would directly violate fundamental principles of international law.

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.

An international convention on prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity would be a visible step toward accountability.