Marquette University Law School Faculty Blog

China’s New Air Defense Identification Zone

Post author:Ryan Scoville
Post published:November 26, 2013
Post category:International Law & Diplomacy Public

Three days ago China’s Ministry of National Defense established an Air Defense Identification Zone (“ADIZ”) for the East China Sea. According to the announcement, foreign aircraft operating within the ADIZ will be subject to a couple of requirements: First, they must provide Chinese authorities with various means of identification, including by reporting flight plans, maintaining two-way radio communications and responding in a timely manner to inquiries, displaying clear marks of nationality, and maintaining the operation of any secondary radar transponders. Second, the aircraft must “follow the instructions” of Chinese authorities. If any aircraft fails to provide identification or follow instructions, “China’s armed forces will adopt defensive emergency measures.” The ADIZ is outlined in red in the map above and, most notably, includes the air territory above the contested Senkaku / Diaoyu Islands. Japan has warned that the ADIZ creates a risk of “unpredictable events,” while Secretary of State John Kerry and Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel said that they are “deeply concerned” about China’s announcement and committed to defending Japan. The obvious purpose of the ADIZ is to further whittle away at Japan’s de facto control over the Islands. In this post, I want to raise two brief points on the legality of this measure.

Lincoln and JFK

Post author:Melissa Love Koenig
Post published:November 23, 2013
Post category:Legacies of Lincoln Legal History Legal Writing Public

PBS documentary Lincoln@Gettysburg paints a vivid picture of Lincoln and those close to him in the days surrounding his oration at Gettysburg. Lincoln’s wife Mary Todd begged him not to leave for Gettysburg because their young son Tad was seriously ill. He went anyway. Lincoln’s valet, William Johnson, an African-American free man, accompanied Lincoln to Gettysburg and listened to Lincoln practice his speech that morning. Lincoln left Gettysburg with a fever and came down with smallpox. Johnson died weeks later from smallpox after caring for Lincoln. Lincoln chose the inscription “Citizen” on Johnson’s tombstone, and Johnson was buried at Arlington cemetery.

And, Lincoln knew that his speech, just ten sentences long, would be transmitted by telegraph and printed in newspapers across the nation. Lincoln, in those ten sentences, was reaching out to the people at the Gettysburg ceremony, but he was also reaching out to the nation. It was unusual for presidents to give this type of speech in those days, but Lincoln accepted the invitation to speak at Gettysburg. Lincoln, it could be said, was a (social) media genius.

The Gender Binary

Post author:Anna High
Post published:November 22, 2013
Post category:Constitutional Law Family Law Human Rights Public

Western society has traditionally assumed a gender binary, classifying sex and gender as “male” or “female.” This binary is reflected in many aspects of our legal system. However in recent decades, the gender binary, and related assumptions about the fixed nature and unambiguous meaning of sex and gender, has been challenged by transsexual, transgendered and intersex people seeking legal recognition of their sex and/or gender identity and protection from discrimination based thereon.

In the US, the majority of states now permit alteration of sex on birth certificates for transsexual persons (whether sex-reassignment surgery is required varies from state to state), although a handful of states still take a “fixed from birth” approach to legal sex. The legal landscape in relation to marriage for transsexual people is similarly inconsistent and in flux.

Challenging the fixed nature of sex/gender is an important development, but in most jurisdictions, the gender binary has been kept legally intact. More recently, some jurisdictions are grappling with the question of “other-gendered” and “other-sexed” persons (the terms are not synonymous – the Norrie case, below, was framed as an issue of biological sex, not gender identity.) The issue has come to a head in Australia, where special leave to appeal to the High Court has been granted in a case involving a person who wishes to be recognized as legally genderless.