Was Judge Weinstein's Dismissal of the Agent Orange Suit Justified?

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter kat
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Judge Weinstein's dismissal of the Agent Orange suit brought by Vietnamese victims was based on the conclusion that the random poisoning resulting from deforestation during the Vietnam War does not constitute a crime against humanity or a violation of any treaty. The ruling emphasized that customary international law requires specific categories for crimes against humanity, such as genocide or torture, none of which applied to the use of Agent Orange. The decision sparked significant debate regarding the legal definitions and implications of chemical warfare versus environmental actions during conflict.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of customary international law and its definitions of crimes against humanity.
  • Familiarity with the historical context of the Vietnam War and the use of Agent Orange.
  • Knowledge of legal frameworks surrounding class action lawsuits.
  • Awareness of the implications of environmental damage in wartime scenarios.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the legal definitions of crimes against humanity under international law.
  • Examine historical case studies of chemical warfare and their legal outcomes.
  • Investigate the impact of Agent Orange on Vietnamese populations and subsequent legal actions.
  • Explore the role of environmental law in wartime and its implications for future conflicts.
USEFUL FOR

Legal scholars, human rights activists, historians studying the Vietnam War, and individuals interested in environmental law and its intersection with military actions.

kat
Messages
42
Reaction score
0
Interesting ruling on the Class action Suite by vietnamese victims of Agent Orange

Why Judge Weinstein Dismissed VAVAO's Agent Orange ATCA Suit

So why, in the end, did Judge Weinstein dismiss the Agent Orange suit - having rejected all these possible arguments for dismissal?

The reason he gave was simple: The random poisoning of a large number of people, if it is a side-effect of the deforestation of a battleground, is neither a crime against humanity, nor a violation of any treaty to which the U.S. was a signatory at the time the poisoning occurred.

Customary international law, Judge Weinstein reasoned, requires crimes against humanity to fit into one of a number of relatively narrow categories: genocide, enslavement, deportation or forcible transfer of population, torture, or forced pregnancy. But poisoning with Agent Orange (at least as it was done by the U.S.), he concluded, fit none of these categories.

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/sebok/20050321.html
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Like it was yesterday

I've always felt that the coverup and denial by our government and the chemical companies was a war-crime it itself. A lot of birth defects and deaths should of been treated and studied but alas our government did yet another coverup.
I remember in 1970, about 6am (still dark) walking to pick up messages with a fellow soldier as a truck drove by spraying. My friend backed up to avoid the spray and said "you should back up because that stuff may be toxic or something". I chose not to back up because there could be mines planted in the ground and I figured the toxins sprayed would be slower to act and the lesser of two evils.
A decade later the VA hospital told me that nothing was sprayed in my area of Nam and that Agent Orange wasn't bad anyway. (I felt like finding some and throwing it on the doctor and seeing if she still felt that way).
By the way, I have a few photos of a fence line in that area on my website homepage at the bottom. It is probably slow to load but you can tell that not much grew there even though the area was a rainy area that normally had a lot of plant growth. Gil of http://www.surrealcity.com
 



The dismissal of the Agent Orange case is certainly an interesting ruling, and one that has sparked much debate and discussion. While it may seem like a disappointing outcome for the Vietnamese victims, there are valid reasons for Judge Weinstein's decision. As the article points out, the use of Agent Orange was not considered a crime against humanity or a violation of any treaty at the time it occurred. This is an important factor to consider in the context of the case.

Furthermore, Judge Weinstein's reasoning that the poisoning with Agent Orange did not fit into any of the categories of crimes against humanity is also worth considering. While it may have had devastating effects on the victims, the use of Agent Orange was not specifically intended to target a certain group of people based on their race, ethnicity, or religion - which is often a defining characteristic of crimes against humanity.

It is also important to note that the use of Agent Orange was a side-effect of deforestation, rather than a deliberate act of chemical warfare. This further complicates the issue and makes it difficult to classify it as a crime against humanity.

Overall, while the dismissal of the case may be disappointing for the Vietnamese victims, it is important to consider the legal complexities involved and the limitations of international law in this situation. It is also worth noting that this ruling does not diminish the suffering and impact that Agent Orange had on the victims and their families.