Coping with Combat Claims: An Analysis of the Foreign Claims Act's Combat Exclusion

Authors

Jordan Walerstein, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law

Abstract

The purpose of this Note is to show that, although the FCA has positively impacted U.S. military operations, the so-called "combat exclusion" severely hampers its effectiveness. Therefore, Congress should eliminate the distinction between combat and noncombat claims and adopt a unified, permanent claims system to adjudicate all claims made by civilians against U.S. military forces operating overseas. Part II of this Note explores the origins of the "combat exclusion" in international law, and Part III traces the history of civilian compensation through World War I and World War II. Part IV surveys U.S. military use of the FCA and ad hoc adjudication systems in conflicts after World War II, while Part V sets forth the contemporary claims adjudication framework. Part VI analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of the FCA and proposes a permanent, unified claims system to handle both combat and noncombat claims. This Note generally focuses on U.S. Army-administered FCCs because the Department of Defense ("DoD") has assigned it sole responsibility for claims resolution in most conflicts, excluding administration by the Navy, Air Force, or Marines.

Disciplines

Dispute Resolution and Arbitration | International Law | Law | Law and Gender | Torts

Recommended Citation

Jordan Walerstein, Coping with Combat Claims: An Analysis of the Foreign Claims Act's Combat Exclusion, 11 Cardozo J. Conflict Resol. 319 (2009).
Available at: https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/cjcr/vol11/iss1/14