State Secrets, Open Justice, and the Criss-Crossing Evolution of Privilege in the United States and the United Kingdom

L'Observateur des Nations Unies, Vol. 29, p. 171, Spring 2011

19 Pages Posted: 17 Aug 2011

See all articles by Steven D. Schwinn

Steven D. Schwinn

John Marshall Law School (Chicago)

Date Written: August 16, 2011

Abstract

This essay argues that the state secrets privilege in the United States and the corresponding public interest immunity in the United Kingdom have evolved in exactly the opposite direction. Thus in the United States, the state secrets privilege has evolved from a common law privilege that allowed for meaningful judicial review to a potentially sweeping constitutional privilege that crowds out any consideration of the plaintiff's interest in access. But in the United Kingdom, public interest immunity evolved from a robust immunity with no meaningful judicial review to a much weaker immunity with significant judicial oversight and consideration of the plaintiff's interest in access to justice.

This essay compares the contemporary applications of the two privileges directly, by examining how courts treated the privileges in two very similar cases – Binyam Mohamed's case in both countries arising out of his extraordinary rendition and torture.

Keywords: state, secrets, privilege, public, interest, immunity

Suggested Citation

Schwinn, Steven D., State Secrets, Open Justice, and the Criss-Crossing Evolution of Privilege in the United States and the United Kingdom (August 16, 2011). L'Observateur des Nations Unies, Vol. 29, p. 171, Spring 2011. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1910923

Steven D. Schwinn (Contact Author)

John Marshall Law School (Chicago) ( email )

315 South Plymouth Court
Chicago, IL 60604
United States
312.386.2865 (Phone)

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
69
Abstract Views
432
rank
330,192
PlumX Metrics