Digital Commons Network^™

Tortured History: Finding Our Way Back To The Lost Origins Of The Eighth Amendment, Celia Rumann

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Suspension And The Extrajudicial Constitution, Trevor W. Morrison

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

What happens when Congress suspends the writ of habeas corpus? Everyone agrees that suspending habeas makes that particular - and particularly important - judicial remedy unavailable for those detained by the government. But does suspension also affect the underlying legality of the detention? That is, in addition to making the habeas remedy unavailable, does suspension convert an otherwise unlawful detention into a lawful one? Some, including Justice Scalia in the 2004 case Hamdi v. Rumsfeld and Professor David Shapiro in an important recent article, answer yes.

This Article answers no. I previously offered that same answer in a symposium essay; …

Rendition To Torture: The Case Of Maher Arar: Hearing Before The H. Comm. On Foreign Affairs,, 110th Cong., Oct. 18, 2007 (Statement Of David D. Cole, Geo. U. L. Center), David Cole

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.

In Case Of Emergency, David Cole

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court, Guantanamo Bay And Justice Fix-It, Ronald W. Meister

Cornell Law School Berger International Speaker Papers

In the summer of 2004, the United States Supreme Court ruled on three cases involving individuals detained as "enemy combatants." Given the issues of Presidential power, habeas corpus and individual rights involved, there was a lot of speculation about the historical importance of the decisions. This presentation examines these three decisions and what they teach us about the Supreme Court and government in the 21st century.

The New Mccarthyism: Repeating History In The War In Terrorism, David Cole

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This Essay will argue that the government has invoked two methods in particular in virtually every time of fear. The first, discussed in Part I, involves a substantive expansion of the terms of responsibility. Authorities target individuals not for what they do or have done but based on predictions about what they might do. These predictions often rely on the individuals' skin color, nationality, or political and religious associations. The second method, the subject of Part II, is procedural-the government invokes administrative processes to control, precisely so that it can avoid the guarantees associated with the criminal process. In hindsight, …

Security And Freedom: Are The Governments' Efforts To Deal With Terrorism Violative Of Our Freedoms?, David Cole

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

One of the most common things that is said about September 11th is that it changed everything. In some respects, that is true. In the most important respects it would be more accurate to say it has changed everything for some, far more than it has for others. One instance of that can be seen in a pole that National Public Radio did one year after September 11th. They asked people to what extent their life had changed. They asked them whether they had to give up any important rights or freedoms in the war on terrorism. Only seven percent …

Jose Padilla: Enemy Combatant Or Common Criminal, Samantha A. Pitts-Kiefer

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

In Aid Of Removal: Due Process Limits On Immigration Detention, David Cole

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In this Article, I seek to demonstrate the radical consequences that taking due process seriously would have for immigration detention as currently practiced. Part I lays out the general principles that apply to civil preventive detention, which establish that substantive due process is violated without an individualized showing after a fair adversarial hearing that there is something to prevent, namely danger to the community or flight. Part II applies this general framework to immigration detention. It first demonstrates, by a review of Supreme Court decisions, that the Court has applied the same due process principles to immigration detention that it …

Protecting Constitutional Freedoms In The Face Of Terrorism: Hearing Before The S. Comm. On The Judiciary, 107th Cong., Oct. 3, 2001 (Statement Of David D. Cole, Prof. Of Law, Geo. U. L. Center), David Cole

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.