The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Today in Supreme Court History: July 27, 1929
/27/1929: The Geneva Conventions are signed by United States. The Supreme Court would consider the Conventions in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006).

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Too bad North Vietnam didn't
Utilitarians want to scream, and to go full ghetto on the heartless, toxic lawyer profession. This convention was superceded in 1949. It immunizes the greedy elite that start wars to get enriched. It forces the killing of millions of working people who just want to go home. It forces the destruction of $trillions in infrastructure. The resulting war and damage is the number one failure of the toxic lawyer profession.
1949 Geneva Conventions (Expanded Scope)
After the atrocities of World War II, four new conventions were adopted on August 12, 1949, vastly expanding protections:
The Four 1949 Conventions:
Convention I: Wounded and sick in armed forces on land.
Convention II: Wounded, sick, and shipwrecked at sea.
Convention III: Updated rules on POWs (replacing the 1929 version).
Convention IV: Protection of civilians in times of war, including those in occupied territories.
Key Improvements:
Civilians gained protected status during conflict (especially under Convention IV).
Expanded protections to medical and religious personnel.
Neutral observers (e.g., Red Cross) given access to verify conditions.
Prohibition of torture, collective punishment, and hostage-taking.
Clearer rules on fair trials for detainees.
Common Article 3: Applies humanitarian standards to internal conflicts and civil wars.
Waterboarding is the most effective interrogation method and causes no damage. It should the first go to method for interrogating dangerous prisoners 12 hours a day, including our own serial killers and king pins. Get their passwords. The families of the political hierarchies should all be taken hostages, with body parts delivered on a regular basis to the leadership of the enemy. After 9/11, the lawyer profession shut down all air travel, save for the flight of the family of the Osama Bin Laden out of the country. The lawyer profession is the internal enemy of our nation. The PC lawyer profession also ordered the female FBI agent reporting a dozen Arabs were taking flight lessons to not interview them. 9/11, 100% the fault of the lawyer profession.
and we Waterboard our own Aircrew during their Survival Evasion Resistance Escape training
The military doctrine of the USA must change. First, fire all the lawyers. Second, the first casualty of war should be the family of the national leader and of his hierarchy, as a warning. The second casualty should be the leadership and elites, the political hierarchy, the intellectuals, the religious leaders, the financiers. These should be named and located at the start. Stop killing millions of working people who just want to go home. Stop bustin' the infrastructure.
You may argue, they can do that to us just as easily. Yea, so? Don't start a war. You're cool. To deter.
The military budget of the USA should be $100 billion for drones to visit these people at home, not $1 trillion.
Waterboarding is the most effective interrogation method and causes no damage
John McCain was waterboarded in the Hanoi Hilton. Not "to try it out and see." He said it's torture. That should be enough for anybody. And these guys also tied their wrists behind their backs and lifted them into the air by their hands.
The North Vietnamese were going to send him home early as a gesture of goodwill, as his father was an admiral. He declined, refusing to leave his men behind.
Trump called him a loser.
While dying of brain cancer, he requested to be the last senator to vote on Obamacare repeal. He voted against it, defeating the big Trump and Republican show project for the past 5 years.
For want of a self-edit mechanism, the shoe was lost...
McCain, hero or dunderhead protected by admiral father? There is a question about his being shot down in Vietnam, or just incompetent, flying too low. See the funeral Eulogy by his Chief of Staff, about the time he was picked up his first day at work. He endured a terrifying ride, and McCain went to the wrong place. He crashed flying to the Army Navy game. Fifth from the bottom of 900 grads at Annapolis. McCain had several non-combat aviation accidents before being deployed to Vietnam:
Spain (1960): He flew too low and struck power lines, causing a blackout in a town.
Corpus Christi Bay (1958): He crashed into the bay during landing due to misjudging altitude.
He may have caused a carrier fire that killed 13 people.
He was always a strong critic of Obamacare. He voted to save it only to spite Trump. McCain was not expelled from the Navy because of the favoritism of his admiral father.
John S. McCain III did a bangup job as a Navy pilot.
Multiple times.
As they were not signatories, their troops and civilians were not entitled to the protections of the Geneva Convention.
So your rights as a human being depend on whether your government has signed a piece of paper?
Welcome to lawyerhood.
US followed the Geneva Conventions, North Vietnam did not.
Your rights come from God.
How, and if, they are protected depends on the government.
Your rights come from God.
How, and if, they are protected depends on the government.
It is also up to human beings to tell everyone what rights God has given us, so your first statement is of no practical use.
For the second statement, that isn't what I was getting at with my question to Michael. His assertion is that people only have rights under the Geneva Convention if their government had signed on to those accords. Not that they are only protected as a practical matter when they are from signatory nations, in the sense of having a government that will go to bat for them, but that the rights recognized by the Geneva Conventions only exist for people whose governments are signatories. And, that no nation that is a signatory to the Conventions is obligated to treat people according to those laws if they are from nations that aren't signatories. (Or no nation, in the case of the stateless.)
I call bullshit on that. Show me where in international law that this is true.
Actually, Yahweh, as described in the Hebrew Bible, was no great protector of human rights. Why should we regard him as the grantor thereof?
He is the most prolific mass murderer in the history of English literature -- think about the Great Flood, the wholesale arson of multiple cities, the Tenth Plague, the drowning of the Pharoah's army in the Red Sea.
Yahweh commanded his Chosen People to perform genocide, including the mass slaughter of infants and children, and slavery. All quotations here are from the Revised Standard Version.
"However, in the cities of the nations the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the LORD your God has commanded you." Deuteronomy 20:16-17.
Samuel said to Saul, “I am the one the LORD sent to anoint you king over his people Israel; so listen now to the message from the LORD. This is what the LORD Almighty says: ‘I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’ ” I Samuel 15:1-3 (emphasis added)
"Sama'ria shall bear her guilt, because she has rebelled against her God; they shall fall by the sword, their little ones shall be dashed in pieces, and their pregnant women ripped open." Hosea 13:16 (emphasis added)
"Then they utterly destroyed all in the city [of Jericho,] both men and women, young and old, oxen, sheep, and asses, with the edge of the sword." Joshua 6:21
"And the LORD said to me, 'Behold, I have begun to give Sihon and his land over to you; begin to take possession, that you may occupy his land.' Then Sihon came out against us, he and all his people, to battle at Jahaz. And the LORD our God gave him over to us; and we defeated him and his sons and all his people. And we captured all his cities at that time and utterly destroyed every city, men, women, and children; we left none remaining[.]" Deuteronomy 2:31-34
"So the LORD our God gave into our hand Og also, the king of Bashan, and all his people; and we smote him until no survivor was left to him. And we took all his cities at that time--there was not a city which we did not take from them--sixty cities, the whole region of Argob, the kingdom of Og in Bashan. All these were cities fortified with high walls, gates, and bars, besides very many unwalled villages. And we utterly destroyed them, as we did to Sihon the king of Heshbon, destroying every city, men, women, and children." Deuteronomy 3:3-6
"When the LORD your God brings you into the land which you are entering to take possession of it, and clears away many nations before you, the Hittites, the Gir'gashites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Per'izzites, the Hivites, and the Jeb'usites, seven nations greater and mightier than yourselves, and when the LORD your God gives them over to you, and you defeat them; then you must utterly destroy them; you shall make no covenant with them, and show no mercy to them. You shall not make marriages with them, giving your daughters to their sons or taking their daughters for your sons." Deuteronomy 7:1-3.
"And Joshua took Makke'dah on that day, and smote it and its king with the edge of the sword; he utterly destroyed every person in it, he left none remaining; and he did to the king of Makke'dah as he had done to the king of Jericho. Then Joshua passed on from Makke'dah, and all Israel with him, to Libnah, and fought against Libnah; and the LORD gave it also and its king into the hand of Israel; and he smote it with the edge of the sword, and every person in it; he left none remaining in it; and he did to its king as he had done to the king of Jericho. And Joshua passed on from Libnah, and all Israel with him, to Lachish, and laid siege to it, and assaulted it: and the LORD gave Lachish into the hand of Israel, and he took it on the second day, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and every person in it, as he had done to Libnah. Then Horam king of Gezer came up to help Lachish; and Joshua smote him and his people, until he left none remaining. And Joshua passed on with all Israel from Lachish to Eglon; and they laid siege to it, and assaulted it; and they took it on that day, and smote it with the edge of the sword; and every person in it he utterly destroyed that day, as he had done to Lachish. Then Joshua went up with all Israel from Eglon to Hebron; and they assaulted it, and took it, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and its king and its towns, and every person in it; he left none remaining, as he had done to Eglon, and utterly destroyed it with every person in it. Then Joshua, with all Israel, turned back to Debir and assaulted it, and he took it with its king and all its towns; and they smote them with the edge of the sword, and utterly destroyed every person in it; he left none remaining; as he had done to Hebron and to Libnah and its king, so he did to Debir and to its king. So Joshua defeated the whole land, the hill country and the Negeb and the lowland and the slopes, and all their kings; he left none remaining, but utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the LORD God of Israel commanded. Joshua 10:28-40
In the case of Midian, as described in Numbers 31, the Hebrew army slew all the men and captured the women and children. (vv 7, 9) Moses was angered that they had let the women live. (vv 14-15) Moses ordered that all male children and every woman that had had sex be killed, sparing only the virgin females, whom the soldiers were to keep for themselves. (vv 17-18)
Yahweh further condoned the ancient Israelites enslavement people of other nations, and prescribed rules for the treatment of fellow Hebrew slaves. He authorized fathers to sell their daughters into slavery.
"As for your male and female slaves whom you may have: you may buy male and female slaves from among the nations that are round about you. You may also buy from among the strangers who sojourn with you and their families that are with you, who have been born in your land; and they may be your property. You may bequeath them to your sons after you, to inherit as a possession for ever; you may make slaves of them, but over your brethren the people of Israel you shall not rule, one over another, with harshness. Leviticus 25:44-46.
"When a man strikes his slave, male or female, with a rod and the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. But if the slave survives a day or two, he is not to be punished; for the slave is his money." Exodus 21:20-21.
When you buy a Hebrew slave, he shall serve six years, and in the seventh he shall go out free, for nothing. If he comes in single, he shall go out single; if he comes in married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall be her master's and he shall go out alone. But if the slave plainly says, 'I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free,' then his master shall bring him to God, and he shall bring him to the door or the doorpost; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him for life." Exodus 21:2-6
"When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she shall not go out as the male slaves do. If she does not please her master, who has designated her for himself, then he shall let her be redeemed; he shall have no right to sell her to a foreign people, since he has dealt faithlessly with her. If he designates her for his son, he shall deal with her as with a daughter. If he takes another wife to himself, he shall not diminish her food, her clothing, or her marital rights. And if he does not do these three things for her, she shall go out for nothing, without payment of money." Exodus 7-11.
But, but...God was just giving people rules relative to what they knew. They weren't ready to be compassionate or even merciful toward the people of other nations, so they had to do those things. Besides, those peoples were sacrificing their own children to Moloch or Ba'al or whatever, so they needed to be wiped out! Their sinfulness couldn't be allowed into the kingdoms of God's chosen people.
French Indochina in '29.
Like I said, too bad North Vietnam didn't
I support full reciprocity. They beat and torture ours, we do the same but to their elites only, the people issuing the orders and enriching themselves.
Is it worth the paper it's written on?
Not unless or until a first world power is willing to use war against another first world power to uphold them.
So, no.
"Is it worth the paper it's written on?"
No. Western nations follow them but African and Asians countries do not.
Even Germany more or less followed it in treatment of US and UK prisoners, with some big exceptions.
We have fought Japan, China, North Korea, North Vietnam, Iraq, Afghans and various terrorist orgs since 1929. Not one has ever obeyed the Conventions.
Reciprocity should be the military policy. Start by visiting the political hierarchy, their families. Take hostages. Send body parts. Visit the intellectuals, the financiers, the religious leaders. Today, add the influencers of the enemy. Let the enemies of the nation live as Saddam did, sleeping in a different apartment every night even before AirBnB, driving a beat Nissan cab, even before Uber.
"That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do."
https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/072723zr_j4ek.pdf
An order regarding the Mountain Valley Pipeline was handed down two years ago. "The application to vacate stays presented to The Chief Justice and by him referred to the Court is granted."
They added this atypical comment: "Although the Court does not reach applicant’s suggestion that it treat the application as a petition for a writ of mandamus at this time, that determination is without prejudice to further consideration in light of subsequent developments."