Stephen Vladeck


Stephen Vladeck, Professor of Law at American University Washington College of Law, discusses the legal challenges brought to bear against unconstitutional government actions, the Obama administration’s so-far successful effort to keep Bagram prison free from judicial oversight, the high burden of proof on a prisoner to show the location of his detention was explicitly chosen to skirt the law and language in the National Defense Authorization Act that potentially criminalizes defense lawyers who represent terrorist suspects.

MP3 here. (25:31)

Stephen I. Vladeck is a Professor of Law at American University Washington College of Law, where his teaching and research focus on federal jurisdiction, national security law, constitutional law (especially the separation of powers), and international criminal law. A nationally recognized expert on the role of the federal courts in the war on terrorism, he was part of the legal team that successfully challenged the Bush Administration’s use of military tribunals at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U.S. 557 (2006), and has co-authored amicus briefs in a host of other lawsuits challenging the U.S. government’s surveillance and detention of terrorism suspects.

Vladeck has also drafted reports on related issues for a number of organizations, including the First Amendment Center, the Constitution Project, and the ABA’s Standing Committee on Law and National Security, and he is a senior editor of the peer-reviewed Journal of National Security Law and Policy.

Vladeck is also a regular contributor to PrawfsBlawg and National Security Advisors; is the Chair of the Association of American Law Schools’ Section on National Security Law, and Chair-Elect of the Section on New Law Professors; and is admitted to practice in the State of New York, Third Department.

4 thoughts on “Stephen Vladeck”

  1. Now just calm down Scott! Just because people are continuing to be tortured in Bagram and have no hope for a trial within the next 5 years doesn't mean that you should get worked up. It's pretty obvious that Obama has made some significant changes, at least in the words used and his ability to get people Mr. Vladeck to cut him some slack.

    When I hear people like Mr. Vladeck speak, it scares me because he seems reasonable and like he truly cares. But what I hear from him is that he's being swept along by the current which is dragging our country towards more acceptance of government lawlessness. Scott, you have every right to remain indignant and outraged. We should be upset that people are continuing to be tortured and killed and illegally detained. And we shouldn't let the half ass reforms Obama has enacted obscure the fact that he's maintained the ugliest and most substantial parts of what the Bush-Cheney-Yoo and Addington gang began.

  2. There are two diffs between O & W.

    1. O has mainstreamed all the lawbreaking of W.
    2. O is a bigger hypocrite than W, so he has a softer face and sometimes sez something nice that he doesn't mean.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.