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

President/Executive Department Commons

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

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in President/Executive Department

"Undead" Wartime Cases: Stare Decisis And The Lessons Of History, Harlan G. Cohen Mar 2010

"Undead" Wartime Cases: Stare Decisis And The Lessons Of History, Harlan G. Cohen

Scholarly Works

References to the “lessons of history” are ubiquitous in law. Nowhere has this been more apparent than in recent debates over U.S. counterterrorism policy. In response to the Bush Administration’s reliance on World War II-era decisions - Johnson v. Eisentrager, Ex Parte Quirin, Hirota v. MacArthur, and In re Yamashita - opponents have argued that these decisions have been rejected by the “lessons of history.” They argue that the history of wartime cases is one marked by executive aggrandizement, panic-driven attacks on civil liberties, and overly quiescent courts - none of which should be repeated.

But what does it really …


Placing Your Faith In The Constitution, Harold H. Bruff Jan 2010

Placing Your Faith In The Constitution, Harold H. Bruff

Publications

No abstract provided.


Legalism And Decisionism In Crisis, Noa Ben-Asher Jan 2010

Legalism And Decisionism In Crisis, Noa Ben-Asher

Faculty Publications

In the years since September 11, 2001, scholars have advocated two main positions on the role of law and the proper balance of powers among the branches of government in emergencies. This Article critiques these two approaches-which could be called Legalism and Decisionism-and offers a third way. Debates between Legalism and Decisionism turn on (1) whether emergencies can be governed by prescribed legal norms; and (2) what the balance of powers among the three branches of government should be in emergencies. Under the Legalist approach, legal norms can and should guide governmental response to emergencies, and the executive branch is …