FromMilligantoBoumediene:Three Models of Emergency Jurisprudence in the American Supreme Court

• Authors: Emily Hartz
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

This article aims to bring philosophical and legal aspects of the discussions of the problem of emergency together by employing classic philosophical views on the problem of emergency to categorize dominating paradigms of legal interpretation in the American Supreme Court.In the first part of the article I review the American Supreme Court's case-history and single out three dominating legal paradigms for interpreting the problem of emergency: the rights model, the extra-legal model and the procedural model. I argue that the procedural model has been by far the most influential.In the second part of the article I ask how this precedence has played out in the context of terrorism cases. I argue that the first four cases that were brought against the government confirmed the procedural model as the Court's primary model for evaluating legal problems related to emergencies. But I also argue that the Court's latest decision on this issue, Boumediene v. Bush from 2008, introduces a shift from the previous general tendency to rely primarily on a procedural model towards including substantial rights concerns.

Keywords

EN

The Supreme Court of the United States of America; problem of emergency; terrorism; rights; war

• Publisher: Sciendo
• Journal: Baltic Journal of Law & Politics
• Year: 2010
• Volume: 3
• Issue: 2
• Pages: 69-97

Dates

published

2010-01-01

online

2011-01-21

Contributors

author

Emily Hartz

• Department of Law, Southern University of Denmark, Denmark

References

• Ackerman, Bruce. "The Emergency Constitution." Yale Law Review 113(5) (2004): 1029-1092.
• Agamben, Giorgio. State of Exception. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005 (2003).
• Alexandre, Maurice. "Wartime Control of Japanese-Americans." Cornell Law Quarterly Vol. 28, Issue 4 (1943): 385-458.
• Bryant, A. Christopher, and Carl Tobias. "Quirin Revisited." Wisconsin Law Review, 2003: 309-364.
• Constant, Benjamin. Political Writings. Trans., ed. Fontana, Biancamaria. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988.
• Ferejohn, John, and Pasquale Pasquino. "Law of Exception: A Typology of Emergency Powers." International Journal of Constitutional Law Vol. 2, Issue 3 (2004): 210-239.
• Fisher, Louis. Presidential War Power. University Press of Kansas, 2004.
• Gross, Oren, and Fionnuala Ní Aoláin. Fionnuala. Law in Times of Crisis: Emergency Powers in Theory and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
• Hartz, Emily, and Dimitrios Kyritsis. "Boumediene and the Meaning of Separation of Powers in U.S. Emergency Law." Review of Constitutional Studies [forthcoming] Vol. 15, No. 1 (2010): 149-176.
• Hartz, Emily. "They Had Good Reasons to Hate Us, so We Had Good Reasons to Fear Them": 169-192. In: Gry Ardal and Jacob Bock, eds. Spheres of Exemption, Figures of Exclusion. Aarhus: NSU Press, 2010.
• Hartz, Emily. The Zone of Twilight. PhD thesis. Aarhus University, 2009.
• Issacharoff, Samuel, and H. Pildes, Richard. "Between Civil Libertarianism and Executive Unilateralism: An Institutional Process Approach to Rights at Wartime." Theoretical Inquiries in Law, Vol. 5, Issue 1 (2004): 1-46.
• Katyal, Neal K., and Laurence H. Tribe. "Waging War, Deciding Guilt: Trying the Military Tribunals" Yale Law Journal, Vol. 111, Issue 6 (2002): 1259-1310.
• Locke, John. Two Treaties of Government. London: Everyman, 1993 (1689).
• Machiavelli, Niccolò [di Bernardo dei]. The Prince. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005 (1515).
• Machiavelli, Niccolò [di Bernardo dei]. Discourse. London: Penguin Books, 1984 (1517).
• McLaughlin, Andrew C. A Constitutional History of the United States. Simon Publications, 2001.
• Margulies, Joseph. Guantánamo and the Abuse of President Power. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2006.
• Muller, Eric L. "Inference or impact? Racial Profiling and Internment's True Legacy." Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law Vol. 1, Issue 1 (2003): 103-132.
• Paulsen, Michael Stokes. "Youngstown Goes to War." Constitutional Commentary Vol. 19, Issue 1 (2002): 215-260.
• Pushaw, Robert J. Jr. "The "Enemy Combatant" Cases in Historical Context: The Inevitability of Pragmatic Judicial Review." Notre Dame Law Review Vol. 82, Issue 3 (2007): 1005-1084.
• Rehnquist, William H. All the Laws but One: Civil Liberties in Wartimes. New York: Knopf, 1998.
• Rossiter, Clinton Lawrence and Richard P. Longaker. The Supreme Court and the Commander in Chief. Ithacam N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1976 (1951).
• Shapiro, Steven R. "The Role of Courts in the War against Terrorism: A Preliminary Assessment." The Fletcher Forum of World Affairs Vol. 29, Issue 1 (2005): 103-118.
• Schlesinger, Arthur Meier. The Imperial Presidency. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2004 (1973).
• Spaulding, Norman W. "The Discourse of Law in Time of War: Politics and Professionalism during the Civil War and Reconstruction." William & Mary Law Review Vol. 46, Issue 6 (2005): 2001-2108.
• Taylor, Paul. "The Historical and Legal Norms Governing the Detention of Suspected Terrorists and the Risks Posed by Recent Efforts to Depart from Them." Texas Review of Law & Politics Vol. 12, Issue 2 (2008): 223-266.
• Ugilt, Rasmus, and Emily Hartz. "The Problem of Emergency in the American Supreme Court." Law and Critique Vol. 22, issue 3, (2011): [forthcoming].
• Weglyn, Michi. Years of Infamy: The Untold Story of America's Concentration Camps. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1996.
• Wittes, Benjamin. Law and the Long War: The Future of Justice in the Age of Terror. London: Penguin Books, 2009.
• Yin, Tung. "The Role of Article III Courts in the War on Terrorism." William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal Vol. 13, Issue 4 (2005): 1061-1128.
• Yoo, John C. "Courts at War." Cornell Law Review Vol. 91, Issue 2 (2006): 573-602.
• Yoo, John C. "War and the Constitutional Text." University of Chicago Law Review Vol. 69, Issue 4 (2002): 1639-1684.
• Yoo, John C. "Judicial Review and the War on Terrorism." George Washington Law Review Vol. 72, Issues 1-2 (2003): 427-452.
• Yoo, John C., and James C. Ho. "The Status of Terrorists." Virginia Journal of International Law Vol. 44, Issue 1 (2003): 207-228.
• The Amy Warwick, 67 U.S. 635, 1862, U.S., 1862 (Prize cases).
• Boumediene v. Bush, 553 U.S. 723, 128 S. Ct. 2229, U.S., 2008.
• Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U.S. 557, 126 S. Ct. 2749, U.S., 2006.
• Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507, 124 S. Ct. 2633, U.S., 2004.
• Hirabayashi v. U.S., 320 U.S. 81, 63 S. Ct. 1375, U.S. 1943.
• Korematsu v. U.S., 584 F.Supp. 1406, D.C. Cal., 1984.
• Milligan, Ex parte, 71 U.S. 2, 1866, U.S., 1866
• Quirin, Ex parte, 317 U.S. 1, 63 S. Ct. 2, U.S., 1942.
• Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 124 S. Ct. 2711, U.S., 2004.
• Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579, 72 S. Ct. 863, U.S., 1952.
• The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 64 Stat. 109, 10 U.S.C. ch.47.

Identifiers

DOI

10.2478/v10076-010-0011-y