AILC is an annual case law reporter that provides the full text of U.S. court opinions involving international law issues. The courts covered include all U.S. federal district courts, federal appellate courts, and the U.S. Supreme Court, as well as some state courts, the U.S. Court of Claims,the U.S. Court of International Trade, and the U.S. Tax Court. The series seeks to provide not every single case in which a court refers to international law but rather all cases that analyze at least one international law issue in depth. The list of subjects addressed by these volumes is vast andchanges from year to year, with the inclusion and prominence of most topics turning on their prevalence in a given year's jurisprudence. Some consistently prominent topics are personal jurisdiction over foreign defendants, deportation procedure, and double taxation. Over the last three editions(2006, 2007, and 2008), many topics have developed rapidly and constitute a correspondingly larger portion of the volumes, particularly Terrorism, the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act ("FSIA"), Forum Non Conveniens, and an entirely new, added topic: the National Security Exception (to deportationeligibility). The 2008 edition of AILC also features expanded sections on family law and on the detention of terrorist suspects. The U.S. war on terror and the crisis at Guantanamo have made that last topic a significant and dynamic component of AILC. Each edition of AILC also comes framed with twopractical resources for students and scholars. The first is an introductory editor's note that both reviews international law's major developments for the given year and explains to readers how to use the volumes. The second is a subject index to allow for targeted research. Volume Four continues this edition's discussion of FSIA and moves on to two other, related statutes that provide for claims in U.S. courts: the Alien Tort Claim Act and the Federal Tort Claims Act. This volume also shows how courts are applying the Act of State Doctrine and the Political QuestionDoctrine to new cases. The District Court for Washington, D.C. ruled in Jin vs. Ministry of State Security that China's media-based harassment of Falun Gong members does not trigger the "commercial activity" exception to the FSIA, even though the Chinese government benefits financially from thebroadcast media used in attacking that religious group. Although previous editions of AILC have covered cases on the commercial exception, this year's edition reports on the "terrorism exception" to FSIA, under which a state-sponsor of terrorism cannot use that statute to secure immunity from a U.S.suit. In this year's Bakhtiar v. Iran, the district court held that a political, extrajudicial killing qualifies as terrorism for purposes of the statute and that Iran therefore is not protected by FSIA. In a similar approval of jurisdiction, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals declared in Lane v.Halliburton that military contractors' relationship to the government and to foreign affairs does not automatically allow such corporate defendants protection from suit under the Political Question Doctrine. These cases and others like them make Volume Four a useful reference tool for researchersstudying the jurisdictional arguments common among foreign (and foreign-based) defendants in U.S. cases.