Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Secret Jurisdiction, Cassandra Burke Robertson, Irina D. Manta
Secret Jurisdiction, Cassandra Burke Robertson, Irina D. Manta
Faculty Publications
So-called “confidentiality creep” after the events of 9/11 has given rise to travel restrictions that lack constitutionality and do nothing to improve airline security. The executive branch’s procedures for imposing such restrictions rely on several layers of secrecy: a secret standard for inclusion on the no-fly list, secret procedures for nominating individuals to the list, and secret evidence to support that decision. This combination results in an overall system we call “secret jurisdiction,” in which individuals wanting to challenge their inclusion on the list are unable to learn the specific evidence against them, the substantive standard for their inclusion on …
Legalism And Decisionism In Crisis, Noa Ben-Asher
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 …
Torture, With Apologies, Thomas P. Crocker
Questioning Deference, Christina E. Wells
Questioning Deference, Christina E. Wells
Faculty Publications
This article examines the accepted axiom that courts should defer to the government's actions during national security crises even when such actions potentially violate citizens' constitutional rights. The paper questions two assumptions underlying that axiom - first, that executive officials are best equipped to determine when security needs justify liberty infringements and, second, that judges are particularly unqualified to meddle in security issues, even when civil liberties are involved. Relying on psychological theories regarding the role that fear plays in skewing risk assessment and historical analyses of past crises, the paper argues that times of crisis lend themselves to unnecessary …
At War With Civil Rights And Civil Liberties, Thomas E. Baker
At War With Civil Rights And Civil Liberties, Thomas E. Baker
Faculty Publications
This essay looks at the Supreme Court and acquiescence to measures by the Executive Branch that limit or suspend civil liberties during times of war or threats to national security.