Abstract:In September 2016, hoping to quiet fears about “killer robots,” then-Defense Secretary Ashton Carter promised that whatever weapons systems the United States might develop in the future, “there’s always going to [be] human judgment and discretion.” * J.D. Candidate, Georgetown University Law Center, 2018; M.A. in Security Studies, Walsh School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University, 2011; B.A., University of California-Riverside, 2001. © 2017, Michael Press. 1. Sydney J. Freedberg Jr. & Colin Clark, Killer Robots? ‘Never,’ Defense Secretary Carter Says, BREAKING DEFENSE (Sep. 15, 2016, 4:00AM), http://breakingdefense.com/2016/09/killer-robots never-says-defense-secretary-carter/. 1337 Carter’s policy assurance on the future development of autono mous weapons systems (AWS) was clearly informed by ethical considerations, but it also had a distinct basis in the law of armed conflict (LOAC), embodied in various international treaties. This Note will conduct an analysis of the legal regime surrounding the construction and use of these AWS. In order to do so, it will examine similar weapons systems utilized by the U.S. military in various operations across the globe and current U.S. doctrine on the use of robotic autonomy in weapons, as well as the arguments for and against their fielding. An overview of LOAC and international humanitarian law (IHL) principles will also be explored through a clearly articulated legal review that should be undertaken before any weapon is legally allowed to operate in a battlespace. Subsequently, that legal review will be applied to AWS to investigate whether these weapons systems should be legally prohibited and how certain uses should be restricted. This Note asserts that there is nothing from a legal perspective that fundamentally prohibits the use of AWS in combat situations. However, similar to other weapons, it is the implementation of AWS that could come into conflict with LOAC and IHL. Recommendations for creating and using AWS in line with international legal principles will be interspersed throughout the Note and summarized in the conclusion. Key recommendations include limiting the use of AWS to situations where a system can reliably and predictably abide by the core principles of LOAC, as well as establishing standards and guidelines to ensure that AWS are fielded in such a manner. GEORGETOWN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

Robot Warriors Autonomously Employing Lethal Weapons: Can They Be Morally Justified?

An Ethics of Autonomous Machines: Deontology and Military Robots

THE CASE AGAINST ROBOTIC WARFARE: A RESPONSE TO ARKIN

Applying AI on the Battlefield: The Ethical Debates

Lethal autonomous robotics: Rethinking the dehumanization of warfare

Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems [Ethical, Legal, and Societal Issues]

Logical Limitations to Machine Ethics with Consequences to Lethal Autonomous Weapons

Lethal Autonomous Weapons -- Ethical and Doctrinal Implications

Robot Rights? Let's Talk about Human Welfare Instead

Autonomous Military Robotics: Risk, Ethics, and Design

Artificial intelligence, ethics and human values: the cases of military drones and companion robots

To ban or not to ban. Analyzing the banning process of autonomous weapon systems

Debunking Robot Rights Metaphysically, Ethically, and Legally

Military robots: mapping the moral landscape. By Jai Galliott

Why the United States Must Adopt Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems

The Dark Side of Ethical Robots

An Empirical Examination of the Impact of Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Value Sensitive Design for Autonomous Systems

OF ROBOTS AND RULES : AUTONOMOUS WEAPON SYSTEMS IN THE LAW OF ARMED CONFLICT

Examining Lethal Autonomous Weapons through the Lens of International Humanitarian Law

An architecture for ethical robots

Friend or frenemy? The role of trust in human-machine teaming and lethal autonomous weapons systems