Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Terrorism

National Security Law

Michigan Law Review

Articles 1 - 9 of 9

Full-Text Articles in Law

Separate And Unequal: The Law Of "Domestic" And "International" Terrorism, Shirin Sinnar Jan 2019

Separate And Unequal: The Law Of "Domestic" And "International" Terrorism, Shirin Sinnar

Michigan Law Review

U.S. law differentiates between two categories of terrorism. “International terrorism” covers threats with a putative international nexus, even when they stem from U.S. citizens or residents acting only within the United States. “Domestic terrorism” applies to political violence thought to be purely domestic in its origin and intended impact. The law permits broader surveillance, wider criminal charges, and more punitive treatment for crimes labeled international terrorism. Law enforcement agencies frequently consider U.S. Muslims “international” threats even when they have scant foreign ties. As a result, they police and punish them more intensely than white nationalists and other “domestic” threats. This …


The Legality Of Deliberate Miranda Violations: How Two-Step National Security Interrogations Undermine Miranda And Destabilize Fifth Amendment Protections, Lee Ross Crain Dec 2013

The Legality Of Deliberate Miranda Violations: How Two-Step National Security Interrogations Undermine Miranda And Destabilize Fifth Amendment Protections, Lee Ross Crain

Michigan Law Review

As part of the global “War on Terror,” federal agents intentionally delay issuing Miranda warnings to terrorism suspects during custodial interrogations. They delay the warnings presuming that unwarned suspects will more freely offer vital national security intelligence. After a suspect offers the information he has, agents administer Miranda warnings and attempt to elicit confessions that prosecutors can use at the suspect’s trial. No court has ruled on the constitutionality of this two-step national security interrogation process to determine whether admitting the second, warned confession is allowed under Miranda v. Arizona and its progeny. A fragmented Supreme Court examined two-step interrogations …


Beyond The Battlefield, Beyond Al Qaeda: The Destabilizing Legal Architecture Of Counterterrorism, Robert M. Chesney Nov 2013

Beyond The Battlefield, Beyond Al Qaeda: The Destabilizing Legal Architecture Of Counterterrorism, Robert M. Chesney

Michigan Law Review

By the end of the first post-9/11 decade, the legal architecture associated with the U.S. government’s use of military detention and lethal force in the counterterrorism setting had come to seem relatively stable, supported by a remarkable degree of cross-branch and cross-party consensus (manifested by legislation, judicial decisions, and consistency of policy across two very different presidential administrations). That stability is certain to collapse during the second post-9/11 decade, however, thanks to the rapid erosion of two factors that have played a critical role in generating the recent appearance of consensus: the existence of an undisputed armed conflict in Afghanistan, …


Detention Debates, Deborah N. Pearlstein Jan 2012

Detention Debates, Deborah N. Pearlstein

Michigan Law Review

Since the United States began detaining people in efforts it has characterized, with greater and lesser accuracy, as part of global counterterrorism operations, U.S. detention programs have spawned more than 200 different lawsuits producing 6 Supreme Court decisions, 4 major pieces of legislation, at least 7 executive orders across 2 presidential administrations, more than 100 books, 231 law review articles (counting only those with the word "Guantanamo" in the title), dozens of reports by nongovernmental organizations, and countless news and analysis articles from media outlets in and out of the mainstream. For those in the academic and policy communities who …


Weakening The Bill Of Rights: A Victory For Terrorism, Stephen Reinhardt Apr 2008

Weakening The Bill Of Rights: A Victory For Terrorism, Stephen Reinhardt

Michigan Law Review

What is most remarkable about Richard Posner's latest book-and he has written many-is that he argues that we should repose full confidence in the executive branch to handle the most sensitive constitutional issues of our time without once mentioning the flagrant breaches of law and critical falsehoods with which President Bush and his administration have deluged the public since 9/11. This only seven years after he composed a lengthy tome regarding President Clinton's impeachment in which he appropriately, if harshly, condemned the president for his unethical and illegal conduct, principally his deliberate lies and purposeful lack of candor with the …


Beyond The "War" On Terrorism: Towards The New Intelligence Network, Ronald D. Lee, Paul M. Schwartz Jan 2005

Beyond The "War" On Terrorism: Towards The New Intelligence Network, Ronald D. Lee, Paul M. Schwartz

Michigan Law Review

In Terrorism, Freedom, and Security, Philip B. Heymann undertakes a wide-ranging study of how the United States can - and in his view should - respond to the threat of international terrorism. A former Deputy Attorney General of the United States Department of Justice ("DOJ") and current James Barr Ames Professor of Law at Harvard Law School, Heymann draws on his governmental experience and jurisprudential background in developing a series of nuanced approaches to preventing terrorism. Heymann makes clear his own policy and legal preferences. First, as his choice of subtitle suggests, he firmly rejects the widely used metaphor …


Checks And Balances In Wartime: American British And Israeli Experiences, Stephen J. Schulhofer Jan 2004

Checks And Balances In Wartime: American British And Israeli Experiences, Stephen J. Schulhofer

Michigan Law Review

Three years after an attack that traumatized the nation and prompted massive military and law-enforcement counter-measures, we continue to wrestle with the central dilemma of the rule of law. Which is more to be feared - the danger of unchecked executive and military power, or the danger of terrorist attacks that only an unconstrained executive could prevent? Posed in varying configurations, the question has already generated extensive litigation since September 11, 2001, and a dozen major appellate rulings. Last Term's Supreme Court trilogy - Rasul v. Bush, Hamdi v. Rumsfeld and Rumsfeld v. Padilla - clarified several important points …


Terrorism And The Democratic State, Alona E. Evans Mar 1979

Terrorism And The Democratic State, Alona E. Evans

Michigan Law Review

A Review of A Time of Terror: How Democratic Societies Respond to Revolutionary Violence by J. Bowyer Bell


Extraterritorial Jurisdiction And Jurisdiction Following Forcible Abduction: A New Israeli Precedent In International Law, Michigan Law Review Apr 1974

Extraterritorial Jurisdiction And Jurisdiction Following Forcible Abduction: A New Israeli Precedent In International Law, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

An Israeli military court recently convicted Faik Bulut, a twenty three-year-old Turkish citizen, of the offense of belonging to Al-Fatah in Lebanon and Syria and sentenced him to seven years in prison. Bulut was captured in February 1972 during an Israeli raid 100 miles into Lebanon. Ten fedayeen, who were captured in Lebanon later in 1972, were scheduled to follow Bulut into court to be tried for the same offense. These are the first cases to be tried under a 1972 amendment to the Israeli Penal Law (Offenses Committed Abroad), which states in part: "The courts in Israel are competent …