Law Commons^™

Surveillance, Secrecy, And The Search For Meaningful Accountability, Sudha Setty

Faculty Scholarship

One of the most intractable problems in the debate around maintaining the rule of law while combating the threat of terrorism is the question of secrecy and transparency. In peacetime, important tenets to the rule of law include transparency of the law, limits on government power, and consistency of the law as applied to individuals in the policy. Yet the post-9/11 decision-making by the Bush and Obama administrations is characterized with excessive secrecy that stymies most efforts to hold the government accountable for its abuses. Executive branch policy with regard to detention, interrogation, targeted killing and surveillance are kept secret, …

The United States, In Comparative Counter-Terrorism, Sudha Setty

Faculty Scholarship

The United States, like all other democratic nations that have suffered terrorist attacks, continues to struggle with questions of how to keep its population safe while maintaining the principles of democracy and the rule of law. This Book Chapter discusses the United States' counterterrorism policies, particularly since the September 11 terrorist attacks, and the resulting changes in societal viewpoints, political agendas, and the legal authority to combat terrorism and threats of terrorism.

The government’s aggressive counterterrorism stance has influenced actions and policies outside the United States. The Author’s exploration of counterterrorism policies in the United States include: criminal law and …

Country Report On Counterterrorism: United States Of America, Sudha Setty

Faculty Scholarship

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, led to profound changes in societal viewpoints, political agendas, and the legal authorization to combat terrorism. The United States continues to struggle with keeping its population safe while maintaining the principles of democracy and the rule of law essential to the nation’s character. The U.S. response to terrorism has been multifaceted and expansive, reflective of the U.S. role in global security; debate over these matters will continue for the foreseeable future.

This report, prepared for the American Society of Comparative Law, offers summary, analysis and critique of many aspects of counterterrorism law, including …

Targeted Killings And The Interest Convergence Dilemma, Sudha Setty

Faculty Scholarship

In the 1980s, Professor Derrick Bell posited a theory of interest convergence as part of his critical race theory work, arguing that the major strides forward in civil rights law and policy that benefited African Americans in the 1950s and 1960s only occurred because of the perceived benefits of those changes to white elites during that time. In Bell’s view, it was only at the point at which the interests of powerful whites converged with those of marginalized racial minorities that significant changes in civil rights law could occur.

Twelve years after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, numerous …

Formalism And State Secrets, Sudha Setty

Faculty Scholarship

The state secrets privilege has received a tremendous amount of scholarly attention in the U.S. in the last decade. In September 2009, the Obama administration created a new policy that mandated a more rigorous internal administrative review prior to invoking the state secrets privilege. It appears as though this internal review process has resulted in little difference with regard to the invocation of the privilege at the pleadings stage in cases that allege torture and other human rights abuses. This chapter of the forthcoming comparative law volume Secrecy, National Security and the Vindication of Constitutional Law (David Cole, Federico Fabbrini …

Judicial Formalism And The State Secrets Privilege, Sudha Setty

Faculty Scholarship

Congress has, in the last few years, toyed with the idea of attempting to rein in the executive’s increasing reliance on the state secrets privilege as a means of escaping the possibility of accountability. The Author examines one high-profile case, that of Binyam Mohamed and other plaintiffs claiming that they had been subject to extraordinary rendition, torture, and prolonged detention. The Mohamed litigation offers evidence of a disturbing trend of U.S. courts retreating to formalistic reasoning to extend unwarranted deference to the executive branch in security-related contexts. In this essay the Author limits her analysis to the recent jurisprudence surrounding …

The Rise Of National Security Secrets, Sudha Setty

Faculty Scholarship

Professor Aziz Rana urges a broad and populist reconsideration of the idea that the administration and military are best positioned to make decisions about national security issues. This Article calls for a rethinking of national security secrecy as well. The centralization of security decision-making power in the early Cold War era fostered a culture of government secrecy, with Congress and the judiciary enabling the rise of national security secrecy out of fear that they were ill-equipped to make security-related decisions, and public fear of internal and international security threats trumping concerns about legitimacy or democratic accountability. This culture of secrecy …

National Security Interest Convergence, Sudha Setty

Faculty Scholarship

Over a decade after the attacks of September 11, 2001, lawmakers, scholars, activists, and policy makers continue to confront the questions of whether and to what extent robust counterterrorism laws and policies should be reined in to protect against the abuse of civil rights and the marginalization of outsider groups. This Article uses political and critical race theory to identify areas of national security interest convergence in which political will can be marshaled to limit some national security policies.

Legislators act in their political self-interest — both in terms of responding to party forces and constituents — in casting votes …