National Security Law Commons^™

Securing Food Justice, Sovereignty & Sustainability In The Face Of The Food Safety Modernization Act (Fsma), Eve Kerber

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Driving While License Suspended - Third Degree, A Framework For Requesting Alternative Sentences, Sahar Fathi

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

About The Authors

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Table Of Contents

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Introduction, Jacqueline Mcmurtrie

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Gideon At Fifty -- Golden Anniversary Or Mid Life Crisis, Kim Taylor-Thompson

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Fifty Years After Gideon: It Is Long Past Time To Provide Lawyers For Misdemeanor Defendants Who Cannot Afford To Hire Their Own, Robert C. Boruchowitz

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Gideon: Looking Backward, Looking Forward, Looking In The Mirror, Steven Zeidman

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Legal Financial Obligations: Fulfilling The Promise Of Gideon By Reducing The Burden, Travis Stearns

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Does The Right To Counsel On Appeal End As You Exit The Court Of Appeals?, Nancy P. Collins

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Improving Access To Justice: Plain Language Family Law Court Forms In Washington State, Charles R. Dyer, Joan E. Fairbanks, M. Lynn Greiner, Kirsten Barron, Janet L. Skreen, Josefina Cerrillo-Ramirez, Andrew Lee, Bill Hinsee

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Congress' Encroachment On The President's Power In Indian Law And Its Effect On Executive-Order Reservations, Mark R. Carter Jd, Phd

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Who Should Be The ‘Decider’ On Keeping Our Secrets?, Stephen Henderson

Other Faculty Publications

An invited essay for Constitution Day, also available here: http://blogs.law.widener.edu/constitution2013/2013-essay-authors/stephen-henderson/It addresses the national security surveillance disclosed by Edward Snowden and others, and asks whether a fundamental shift would be prudent in the era of Big Data.

Not Quite A Civilian, Not Quite A Soldier: How Five Words Could Subject Civilian Contractors In Iraq And Afghanistan To Military Jurisdiction , Katherine Jackson

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

A Shattered Looking Glass: The Pitfalls And Potential Of The Mosaic Theory Of Fourth Amendment Privacy, David C. Gray, Danielle Keats Citron

Faculty Scholarship

On January 23, 2012, the Supreme Court issued a landmark non-decision in United States v. Jones. In that case, officers used a GPS-enabled device to track a suspect’s public movements for four weeks, amassing a considerable amount of data in the process. Although ultimately resolved on narrow grounds, five Justices joined concurring opinions in Jones expressing sympathy for some version of the “mosaic theory” of Fourth Amendment privacy. This theory holds that we maintain reasonable expectations of privacy in certain quantities of information even if we do not have such expectations in the constituent parts. This Article examines and …

Reality Check: Detention In The War On Terror, Monica Eppinger

Catholic University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Military Commissions And The Paradigm Of Prevention, David Cole

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Why military commissions? Given the United States’s track record of success in trying terrorists in civilian criminal courts, and the availability of courts-martial to try war crimes, why has the United States government, under both the George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations alike, insisted on proceeding through untested military commissions instead? In May 2009, President Obama defended military commissions with the following claims:

Military commissions have a history in the United States dating back to George Washington and the Revolutionary War. They are an appropriate venue for trying detainees for violations of the laws of war. They allow for …

Revisiting "Special Needs" Theory Via Airport Searches, Alexander A. Reinert

Articles

Controversy has raged since the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) introduced Advanced Imaging Technology, capable of producing detailed images of travelers' bodies, and "enhanced" pat frisks as part of everyday airport travel. In the face of challenges in the courts and in public discourse, the TSA has justified the heightened security measures as a necessary means to prevent terrorist attacks. The purpose of this Essay is to situate the Fourth Amendment implications of the new regime within a broader historical context. Most germane, after the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) introduced sweeping new screening of air travelers in the 1960s and 1970s …

Where Liberty Lies: Civil Society And Individual Rights After 9/11, David Cole

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Had someone told you, on September 11, 2001, that the United States would not be able to do whatever it wanted in response to the terrorist attacks of that day, you might well have questioned their sanity. The United States was the most powerful country in the world, and had the world’s sympathy in the immediate aftermath of the attacks. Who would stop it? Al Qaeda had few friends beyond the Taliban. As a historical matter, Congress and the courts had virtually always deferred to the executive in such times of crisis. And the American polity was unlikely to object …

The First Amendment’S Borders: The Place Of Holder V. Humanitarian Law Project In First Amendment Doctrine, David Cole

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project, the Supreme Court’s first decision pitting First Amendment rights against national security interests since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the Court appears to have radically departed from some of the First Amendment’s most basic principles, including the maxims that speech may not be penalized because of its viewpoint, that even speech advocating crime deserves protection until it constitutes incitement, and that political association is constitutionally protected absent specific intent to further a group’s illegal ends. These principles lie at the core of our political and democratic freedoms, yet Humanitarian Law Project …

Terrorism And The Law: Show Trials And Why The Show Must Go On, Ibpp Editor

International Bulletin of Political Psychology

The author discusses the nature and meaning of terrorism trials during the United States’ war on terror.

"Intelligence" Searches And Purpose: A Significant Mismatch Between Constitutional Criminal Procedure And The Law Of Intelligence-Gathering, Robert C. Power

Pace Law Review

No abstract provided.

Exporting U.S. Criminal Justice, Allegra M. Mcleod

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This article explores how and why, in the Cold War’s wake, the U.S. government began to export U.S.-style criminal law and procedure models to developing and politically transitioning states. U.S. criminal law and development consultants now work in countries across the globe. This article reveals how U.S. initiatives have shaped state and non-state actors’ responses to a range of global challenges, even as this approach suffers from a deep democratic deficit. Further, this article argues that U.S. programs perpetuate U.S.-style legal institutional idolatry (which is often tied to systemic dysfunction both in the United States and abroad), and in so …

The Lexington Principles On The Rights Of Detainees: A Transnational Legal Process Approach To Due Process, David Alan Jordan, Frederic L. Kirgis, R. Brooke Lewis, Thomas Greenwood, Bennett L. Ross, Kathryn M. Zunich

Scholarly Articles

In Boumediene v. Bush, decided June 12, 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court extended the constitutional privilege of habeas corpus to noncitizens detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Courts will now be called upon to assess the propriety of American detainee treatment practices against unclear constitutional standards. The strength and contours of the due process protections the U.S. Constitution will afford these detainees is still an unsettled question. The Lexington Principles are designed to help guide the development of American due process standards as they move outside our borders. These Principles are also intended to serve as a model for those …

The Law Of Armed Conflict And Detention Operations In Afghanistan, Matthew C. Waxman

Faculty Scholarship

In reflecting on the arc of US and coalition detention operations in Afghanistan, three key issues related to the law of armed conflict stand out: one substantive, one procedural and one policy. The substantive matter – what are the minimum baseline treatment standards required as a matter of international law? – has clarified significantly during the course of operations there, largely as a result of the US Supreme Court's holding in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld. The procedural matter – what adjudicative processes does international law require for determining who may be detained? – eludes consensus and has become more controversial …

In The Sweat Box: A Historical Perspective On The Detention Of Material Witnesses, Carolyn B. Ramsey

Publications

After the September 11 terrorist attacks, the Justice Department detained scores of allegedly suspicious persons under a federal material witness statute--a tactic that provoked a great deal of controversy. Most critics assume that the abuse of material witness laws is a new development. Yet, rather than being transformed by the War on Terror, the detention of material witnesses is a coercive strategy that police officers across the nation have used since the nineteenth century to build cases against suspects. Fears of extraordinary violence or social breakdown played at most an indirect role in its advent and growth. Rather, it has …

Administrative Detention Of Terrorists: Why Detain, And Detain Whom?, Matthew C. Waxman

Faculty Scholarship

This article aims to reframe the administrative detention debate, not to resolve it. In doing so, however, it aspires to advance the discussion by highlighting the critical substantive choices embedded in calls for legal procedural reform and by pointing the way toward appropriately tailored legislative options. It argues that the current debate’s focus on procedural and institutional questions of how to detain suspected terrorists has been allowed to overshadow the questions of why administratively detain, and whom to detain. Not only are the answers to these questions at least as important as the procedural rules in safeguarding and balancing liberty …

The Bounds Of Necessity, Jens David Ohlin

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The current controversy surrounding the legality of torture can only be understood through an analysis of the distinction between justified necessity and excused necessity. Although there may be strong prudential reasons for international criminal courts to declare torture unlawful under any circumstance, this would not necessarily prevent a court from recognizing that an excuse may apply. However, the hallmark of the necessity excuse should not be understood, as it is in German law, as an exception that only applies when a defendant breaks the law to save someone close to him. Rather, the basic principle of the excuse ought to …

Ditching "The Disposal Plan": Revisiting Miranda In An Age Of Terror, 20 St. Thomas L. Rev. 155 (2008), Kim D. Chanbonpin

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Book Review, Erin Murphy

Journal of Legal Education

No abstract provided.