Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Liberty, Security, And Judicial Review In The War On Terror: An Analysis Of Supreme Court Approaches To Deference In A Post-9/11 Context, Jacob Oppler
Senior Independent Study Theses
In times of war, the government acts to suppress threats to national security, often curtailing or restricting American civil liberties. Over the course of American history, the Supreme Court has reviewed this legal conflict between civil liberties and national security policies during war. Scholars generally observe the Court’s judicial review as deferential to the government. The War on Terror presents new and different challenges to American civil liberties. While this legal conflict has emerged again under the conditions of a war against terrorism, the war itself is markedly unlike past wars in American history. This research seeks to explain ...
Cases Of Conscience: The Supreme Court And Conscientious Objectors To Military Service During The Post World War Ii Era, Robert S. Rutherfurd
Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers
This thesis examines the history of American conscientious objectors to military service during the aftermath of World War II. It describes why conscientious objectors were viewed with distrust and suspicion for their refusal to bear arms in defense of the nation and considers how groups such as the American Legion and the Veterans of Foreign Wars attempted to prevent COs from enjoying key benefits of U.S. citizenship by demanding that conscientious objectors be excluded from public employment and denied most forms of government assistance. This thesis focuses on decisions of the United States Supreme Court following World War II ...