Constitutional Pathology, the War on Terror, and United States v. Klein
Howard M. Wasserman
Florida International University (FIU) - College of Law
August 25, 2011
Journal of National Security Law & Policy, Vol. 5, p. 211, 2011
Florida International University Legal Studies Research Paper No. 11-19
In "The Irrepressible Myth of Klein" (University of Cincinnati Law Review, 2010), I discuss the meaning, scope, and continued relevance of the Supreme Court's historic decision in United States v. Klein (1871), arguing that Klein is not the judicially powerful a precedent many believe it to be. In this follow-up essay, I apply the insights of my analysis and exposure of Klein's myths to two major pieces of legislation enacted as part of the ongoing War on Terror: The FISA Amendments Act of 2008 (granting retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies involved in warrantless surveillance) and the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (dealing with various issues surrounding the treatment and prosecution of terrorism detainees). I conclude that both laws largely survive constitutional scrutiny under Klein, thus illustrating the lack of doctrinal vigor and power – the myth – of Klein as constitutional precedent.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 26
Keywords: Separation of Powers, Courts, Constitution, War on Terror, Military CommissionsAccepted Paper Series
Date posted: August 25, 2011
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo5 in 0.750 seconds