Do International Criminal Tribunals Deter or Exacerbate Humanitarian Atrocities?

Julian Ku and Jide Nzelibe
Contemporary justifications for international criminal tribunals (ICTs), especially the permanent International Criminal Court, often stress the role of such tribunals in deterring future humanitarian atrocities. But hardly any academic commentary has attempted to explore in depth this deterrence rationale. This Article utilizes economic models of deterrence to analyze whether a potential perpetrator of humanitarian atrocities would likely be deterred by the risk of future prosecution by an ICT. According to…

The End of Bordenkircher: Extending the Logic of Apprendi to Plea Bargaining

Michael M. O'Hear
Although the Supreme Court approved of the use of charging threats nearly thirty years ago in Bordenkircher v. Hayes, a more recent line of cases has subtly undermined key premises of that landmark decision. In order to induce guilty pleas, prosecutors might use any of a number of different tactics. A prosecutor might, for instance, charge aggressively in the first instance and then promise to drop the most serious charges…

The Story of Me: The Underprotection of Autobiographical Speech

Sonja R. West
This Article begins the debate over the constitutional underprotection of autobiographical speech. While receiving significant historical, scientific, religious, and philosophical respect for centuries, the time-honored practice of talking about yourself has been ignored by legal scholars. A consequence of this oversight is that current free speech principles protect the autobiographies of the powerful but leave the stories of “ordinary” people vulnerable to challenge. Shifting attitudes about privacy combined with advanced…

To Remedy or Not to Remedy: The Availability of Disgorgement Under Civil RICO

Andrew Kinworthy