A Comparative Examination of Counter-Terrorism Law and Policy

Journal of Korean Law, Vol. 16, p. 91-144, December 2016

UC Berkeley Public Law Research Paper No. 2949078

54 Pages Posted: 20 Apr 2017

See all articles by Laurent Mayali

Laurent Mayali

University of California, Berkeley - School of Law

John Yoo

University of California at Berkeley School of Law; American Enterprise Institute; Stanford University - The Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace

Date Written: December 2016

Abstract

This article conducts a comparative analysis of U.S. and European counter-terrorism law and policy. Recent attacks by ISIS in the U.S., France, and Germany have revealed important differences between American and European approaches. Before September 11, 2001, the United States responded to terrorism primarily with existing law enforcement authorities, though in isolated cases it pursued military measures abroad. In this respect, it lagged behind the approach of European nations, which had confronted internal terrorism inspired by leftwing ideology or separatist goals. But after the 9-11 attacks, the United States adopted a preventive posture that aimed to pre-empt terrorist groups before they could attack. The Obama administration’s campaign of drone strikes in the Middle East and Africa against al Qaeda, Taliban, and ISIS leaders represents the culmination of this approach. Nevertheless, it has continued to rely on the criminal justice system when terrorist attacks developed within U.S. territory. It has arrived at a hybrid system which tracks geography – the difference between at home and abroad – rather than enemy capability. The European approach has been different. The earlier confrontation with terrorism in France and the United Kingdom encouraged more robust legal authorities there. European nations, however, have struggled to respond to the international dimension of more recent attacks. They have incrementally expanded their existing powers used to address homegrown threats by Marxist-Leninist groups or secessionist movements, but have failed to successfully adopt a more preventive strategy aimed at the foreign roots of the current terrorist threat.

Keywords: Terrorism, Security, Comparative Law, Courts, Legislation, United States, Europe, Constitution

Suggested Citation

Mayali, Laurent and Yoo, John, A Comparative Examination of Counter-Terrorism Law and Policy (December 2016). Journal of Korean Law, Vol. 16, p. 91-144, December 2016, UC Berkeley Public Law Research Paper No. 2949078, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2949078

Laurent Mayali

University of California, Berkeley - School of Law ( email )

215 Law Building
Berkeley, CA 94720-7200
United States

John Yoo (Contact Author)

University of California at Berkeley School of Law ( email )

Boalt Hall
Berkeley, CA 94720-7200
United States
510-600-3217 (Phone)
510-643-2673 (Fax)

American Enterprise Institute ( email )

1789 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Washington, DC 20036
United States

Stanford University - The Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace ( email )

Stanford, CA 94305-6010
United States

HOME PAGE: http://https://www.hoover.org/profiles/john-yoo

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
244
Abstract Views
1,257
Rank
232,878
PlumX Metrics