Can courts be ‘trusted’ in national security crises?
<p>A challenge for any democratic republic is to establish modes of governance that can effectively defeat or mitigate national security threats while also preserving freedoms and public accountability. To many, especially during national security crises, courts are expected to act as guardian...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Other Authors: | |
Format: | Report |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Foundation for Law, Justice and Society
2009
|
Subjects: |
_version_ | 1797082956252053504 |
---|---|
author | Waxman, M |
author2 | The Centre for Socio-Legal Studies |
author_facet | The Centre for Socio-Legal Studies Waxman, M |
author_sort | Waxman, M |
collection | OXFORD |
description | <p>A challenge for any democratic republic is to establish modes of governance that can effectively defeat or mitigate national security threats while also preserving freedoms and public accountability. To many, especially during national security crises, courts are expected to act as guardians of liberty and the boundaries of state power.</p> <p>Historically, US courts have played an important but cautious role in checking aggressive executive actions, and the Supreme Court’s responses to enemy combatant detention practices demonstrate familiar historical patterns of judicial intervention during national security crises.</p> <p>The experience with enemy combatant detentions also illustrates the strategic importance of legitimacy. Whatever their limitations, courts are uniquely suited to provide decision-making legitimacy because of their relative political independence and their deliberative virtues.</p> |
first_indexed | 2024-03-07T01:35:16Z |
format | Report |
id | oxford-uuid:94f42bf3-e933-4bbc-9e28-af38c6fc3b68 |
institution | University of Oxford |
language | English |
last_indexed | 2024-03-07T01:35:16Z |
publishDate | 2009 |
publisher | Foundation for Law, Justice and Society |
record_format | dspace |
spelling | oxford-uuid:94f42bf3-e933-4bbc-9e28-af38c6fc3b682022-03-26T23:42:58ZCan courts be ‘trusted’ in national security crises?Reporthttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_93fcuuid:94f42bf3-e933-4bbc-9e28-af38c6fc3b68Democratic governmentSocio-legal studiesPublic policyAmerican politicsEnglishOxford University Research Archive - ValetFoundation for Law, Justice and Society2009Waxman, MThe Centre for Socio-Legal Studies<p>A challenge for any democratic republic is to establish modes of governance that can effectively defeat or mitigate national security threats while also preserving freedoms and public accountability. To many, especially during national security crises, courts are expected to act as guardians of liberty and the boundaries of state power.</p> <p>Historically, US courts have played an important but cautious role in checking aggressive executive actions, and the Supreme Court’s responses to enemy combatant detention practices demonstrate familiar historical patterns of judicial intervention during national security crises.</p> <p>The experience with enemy combatant detentions also illustrates the strategic importance of legitimacy. Whatever their limitations, courts are uniquely suited to provide decision-making legitimacy because of their relative political independence and their deliberative virtues.</p> |
spellingShingle | Democratic government Socio-legal studies Public policy American politics Waxman, M Can courts be ‘trusted’ in national security crises? |
title | Can courts be ‘trusted’ in national security crises? |
title_full | Can courts be ‘trusted’ in national security crises? |
title_fullStr | Can courts be ‘trusted’ in national security crises? |
title_full_unstemmed | Can courts be ‘trusted’ in national security crises? |
title_short | Can courts be ‘trusted’ in national security crises? |
title_sort | can courts be trusted in national security crises |
topic | Democratic government Socio-legal studies Public policy American politics |
work_keys_str_mv | AT waxmanm cancourtsbetrustedinnationalsecuritycrises |