Hypothetical Legal Review of Use of the U.S. Military in Greenland
- Jan 22
- 1 min read
By Daniel Maurer, Steven J. Lepper, Eugene R. Fidell, Alberto J. Mora and Franklin D. Rosenblatt
Originally published here
This “operational legal review” is the third in a series of essays examining the legal basis for current or potential future U.S. military operations. This is not an official legal review; however, the format and analysis are representative of the legal advice that judge advocates (uniformed lawyers) provide commanders when advising on the lawfulness of specific uses of military forces. The content of this review is not based on any actual legal review or on any classified information; all facts are drawn from publicly available sources by the authors. The authors have drafted this document to illustrate the kind of advice they would have given their commanders in each situation. We offer it in the hope that everyone who reads it will ask whether current or future uses of the United States military are supported by comparable legal analyses and, if not, why not.
The following hypothetical legal review imagines what a senior staff judge advocate’s legal analysis and advice would be if the Commanding General of Special Operations Command or the Commanding General of European Command, dual-hatted as the NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe, was given an order from the Secretary of Defense or President of the United States to plan or execute an operation that placed additional U.S. military forces on Greenland without the consent of Denmark, the NATO member nation with sovereignty over Greenland.
The mock operational legal review follows:
Comments