Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

International Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism pp 1–21Cite as

Civil Rights and Liberties with National Security

The Role of the Federal Judiciary

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:

  • 190 Accesses

Part of the book series: International Human Rights ((IHR))

Abstract

Throughout much of American history, but especially after the attack against the United States on September 11, 2001, the American political system has sought to balance its need to protect national security while still preserving civil rights and civil liberties. In the American system, the federal judiciary is the primary referee in this conflict between order and liberty. This chapter explains in detail the role of the US courts in settling this dispute. The first section outlines the landmark US Supreme Court cases that have guided how the American government has navigated the tension between security and liberty. The second section discusses the scholarly research that seeks to understand how American judges evaluate issues concerning liberty and security. Taken together, these two sections should edify readers of this volume on how American judges approach this important topic in the study of law and courts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

References

  • Authorization for the Use of Military Force (Enrolled Bill), SJ Res 23, 2001. http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/terrorism/sjres23.enr.html. Accessed 11 Sept 2018

  • Banks CP (2004) Protecting (or destroying) freedom through law: the USA PATRIOT Act’s constitutional implications. In: Cohen DB (ed) American National Security and Civil Liberties in an age of terrorism. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, pp 29–70

    Google Scholar 

  • Banks CP, Tauber S (2014) U.S. district court decision-making in USA PATRIOT act cases after September 11. Justice Syst J 35:139–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brettschneider C (2018) Brett Kavanaugh’s radical view of executive power. Politico 4 Sept 2018, https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/09/04/kavanaugh-trump-mueller-executive-power-219634. Accessed 28 Sept 2018

  • Carp RA, Rowland CK (1983) Policymaking and politics in the federal district courts. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesney RM (2005) The sleeper scenario: terrorism-support laws and the demands of prevention. Harv J Legisl 42:1–89

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesney RM (2007a) Federal prosecution of terrorism-related offenses: conviction and sentencing data in light of the ‘soft-sentence’ and ‘data-reliability’ critiques. Lewis and Clark Law Rev 11:851–901

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesney RM (2007b) Beyond conspiracy? Anticipatory prosecution and the challenge of unaffiliated terrorism. South Calif Law Rev 80:425–502

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark TS (2006) Judicial decision making during wartime. J Empir Leg Stud 3:397–419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins PM Jr, Norton DA, Manning KL, Carp RA (2008) International conflicts and decision making on the federal district courts. Justice Syst J 29:121–144

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins PM Jr, Manning KK, Carp RA (2010) Gender, critical mass, and judicial decision making. Law & Policy 32:260–281

    Google Scholar 

  • Demleitner N (2003) How many terrorists are there? Fed Sentencing Rep 16:38–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dinh VD (2005) Liberty and the rule of law after September 11. Wash Univ J Law Policy 19:31–38

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolar B, Shughart WF II (2011) Enforcement of the USA patriot act’s Anti-money laundering provisions: have regulators followed a risk-based approach? Glob Financ J 22:19–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Domke D, Graham ES, Coe K, John SL, Coopman T (2006) Going public as a political strategy: the Bush administration, the echoing press, and the passage of the patriot act. Polit Commun 23:291–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donahue LK (2008) The cost of counterterrorism: power, politics, and liberty. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ducat CR, Dudley RL (1989) Federal district judges and presidential power during the postwar era. J Polit 51:98–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein L, Rowland CK (1991) Debunking the myth of interest group invincibility in courts. Am Polit Sci Rev 85:205–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein L, Ho DE, King G, Segal JA (2005) The Supreme Court during crisis: how war affects only non-war cases. N Y Univ Law Rev 80:1–116

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrier J (2007) The patriot act’s institutional story: more evidence of congressional ambivalence. Polit Sci Polit 40:93–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feiock R (1986) The effects of urban socioeconomic and political contexts on support for business in the federal district courts. Soc Sci J 23:267–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hattem J (2015) “Obama Signs NSA Bill, Renewing Patriot Act Powers,” The Hill, 2 June 2015, http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/243850-obama-signs-nsa-bill-renewing-patriot-act-powers. Accessed 9 Sept 2018

  • Howell B (2004) Seven weeks: The making of the USA Patriot Act. George Washington Law Rev 72:1145–1207

    Google Scholar 

  • Human Rights Watch, “Q&A: Guantanamo Bay, US detentions, and the trump administration,” 27 June 2018., https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/06/27/qa-guantanamo-bay-us-detentions-and-trump-administration#q3. Accessed 11 Sept 2018

  • Johnson BD (2012) Cross-cultural multi-level models: an application to the criminal case processing of indicted terrorists. J Quant Criminol 28:163–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King KL (1998) Does the law matter? Federal district court decision-making in fair housing cases. Soc Sci Res 27:388–409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien DM (2011) Constitutional law and politics: volume 1, struggle for governmental power and accountability, 8th edn. Norton, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien C (2018) Trump Orders Guantanamo Prison to Remain Open. Politico. 31 Jan 2018, https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/31/trump-guantanamo-gitmo-cuba-318569. Accessed 28 Sept 2018

  • O’Harrow Jr. R. (2002) “Six Weeks in Autumn,” Washington Post Magazine, 27 Oct 2002, https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/magazine/2002/10/27/six-weeks-in-autumn/fba1d6e8-106a-42da-8d15-5aa2796f9ef1/?utm_term=.5805a5b5d2d5. Accessed 1 Sept 2018

  • Posner EA, Vermeule A (2007) Terror in the balance: security, liberty, and the court. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Ringquist EJ, Emmert CE (1999) Judicial policymaking in published and unpublished decisions. Polit Res Q 52:7–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Roach K (2011) The 9/11 effect. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts Jr. J (2016) 2016 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary, https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/year-end/2016year-endreport.pdf, Accessed 28 Sept 2018

  • Rowland CK, Carp RA (1996) Politics and Judgment in federal district courts. University Press of Kansas, Lawrence

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan AA (2015) The 9/11 terror cases: constitutional challenges in the war on Al Qaeda. University Press of Kansas, Lawrence

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith BL, Damphousse KR (1996) Punishing political offenders: the effect of political motives on federal sentencing decisions. Criminology 34:289–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Songer Dr, Johnson SW, Stidham R (2003) Presidential success through appointments to the United States District Courts. Justice Syst J 24:283–300

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan A (2018) Trump isn’t merely tolerating torture – he’s celebrating it. The New York Magazine, 6 Apr 2018, http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/04/trump-isnt-merely-tolerating-torture-hes-celebrating-it.html. Accessed 28 Sept 2018

  • Sunstein CR (2008) Judging national security post-9/11: an empirical investigation. Supreme Court Rev 2008:269–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tauber S, Banks C (2015) The impact of the threat of Terrorism on U.S. district court decisions during wartime. Terrorism Polit Violence 29:793–829

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tushnet M (2005) Defending Korematsu? Reflections on civil liberties in wartime. In: Tushnet M (ed) The constitution in wartime: beyond alarmism and complacency. Duke University Press, Durham

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Vlcek W (2008) A leviathan rejuvenated: surveillance, money laundering, and the war on terror. Int J Polit Cult Soc 20:21–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinberg L, Pedahzur A, Hirch-Hoefler S (2010) The challenges of conceptualizing terrorism. Terrorism Polit Violence 16:777–794

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weisselberg CD (2008) Terror in the courts: beginning to assess the impact of terrorism-related prosecutions on domestic criminal law and procedure in the USA. Crime Law Soc Chang 50:25–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitehead JW, Aden SH (2002) Forfeiting ‘enduring freedom’ for ‘homeland security’: a constitutional analysis of the USA PATRIOT act and the justice department’s anti-terrorism initiatives. Am Univ Law Rev 51:1081–1133

    Google Scholar 

  • Wildavsky A (1969) The two presidencies. In: Wildavsky A (ed) The presidency. Little, Brown, Boston, pp 231–243

    Google Scholar 

  • Yates J, Whitford A (1998) Presidential power and the United States Supreme Court. Polit Res Q 51:539–550

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young JK, Findley NG (2011) Promise and pitfalls of terrorism research. Int Stud Rev 13:411–431

    Article  Google Scholar 

Court Cases

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Interdisciplinary Global Studies, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA

    Steven Tauber

  2. Political Science, Kent State University, Kent, OH, USA

    Christopher P. Banks

Authors
  1. Steven Tauber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christopher P. Banks
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Steven Tauber .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. McGill University, Montréal, QC, Canada

    Eran Shor

  2. University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

    Stephen Hoadley

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Tauber, S., Banks, C.P. (2019). Civil Rights and Liberties with National Security. In: Shor, E., Hoadley, S. (eds) International Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism. International Human Rights. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3894-5_24-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3894-5_24-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-3894-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-3894-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Law and CriminologyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation