Iqbal and Bad Apples
Michael C. Dorf
Cornell Law School
January 1, 2010
Lewis & Clark Law Review, Vol. 14, No. 217, 2010
In addition to its important implications for federal civil procedure, the Supreme Court's decision in Ashcroft v. Iqbal put the imprimatur of the Supreme Court on a troubling narrative of the excesses carried out by the Bush Administration in the name of fighting terrorism. In this "few bad-apples narrative," harsh treatment of detainees - especially in the immediate wake of the attacks of September 11th, but also years later in such places as Afghanistan, Iraq, the Guantanamo Bay detention center, and elsewhere - was the work of a small number of relatively low-ranking military and civilian officials who went beyond the limits of the law. The actions of these few bad apples, the narrative goes, were regrettable but not the result of official policy. Actions and statements by both the Bush and Obama Administrations promulgated the few bad-apples narrative. Careful parsing of both the complaint and the Supreme Court opinion in Iqbal shows that in dismissing allegations that high-ranking officials in the Bush Justice Department ordered discriminatory abuse of detainees, the Court accepted that flawed narrative.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 15
Keywords: Ashcroft v. Iqbal, terrorism, Bush administration, Justice Department, Setember 11th, unconstitutional military order, detaineeAccepted Paper Series
Date posted: March 29, 2013
© 2015 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo1 in 1.188 seconds