This Note primarily seeks to challenge Professor Wells’s ideas contributed to the symposium. Specifically, the Constitution creates political and institutional structures that lead to strong executive-branch initiative in military affairs and fairly circumscribed judicial review. Constitutional considerations, as well as precedent, cast doubt on the viability of Wells’s “hard look” proposal and suggest that the Court will—should—continue its pattern of reviewing with deference wartime claims that the President has violated individual rights.
Robert J. Pushaw Jr.,
Defending Deference: A Response to Professors Epstein and Wells,
69 Mo. L. Rev.
Available at: https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/mlr/vol69/iss4/4