scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Gerald F. Flood

Bio: Gerald F. Flood is an academic researcher. The author has an hindex of 1, co-authored 1 publications receiving 2 citations.

Papers
More filters

Cited by
More filters
DissertationDOI
01 Jan 2010
TL;DR: Luebel et al. as discussed by the authors argued that a pattern exists concerning civil liberties and national security in the United States during World War II that resulted in the Supreme Court's Ex Parte Quirin decision in 1942.
Abstract: THE LAWS WILL FALL SILENT: EX PARTE QUIRIN, A TROUBLING PRECEDENT FOR MILITARY COMMISSIONS" BRAD P. LUEBBERT APRIL 13 2010 For over two hundred years a major issue in the history of the United States is the contentious issue of military commissions. Military commissions are not new or specific to the United States, but the United States traces its first military commission to the trial of a British officer, Major John Andre in September 1780. This thesis is about the trial of Nazi saboteurs before a military commission and their battle before the United States Supreme Court. A fight pitting civil liberties and due process versus national security during the time of war and crisis in the United States during World War II that resulted in the Supreme Court's Ex Parte Quirin decision in 1942 which established a dangerous and troubling precedence. The Nazi saboteur case of July 1942 was not a snapshot in time but a precedent that the United States is dealing with at the present time. This thesis demonstrates that a pattern exists concerning civil liberties and national security in the United States. The federal government in times of war and crisis, restrict civil liberties in the name of national security, and only after the crisis passed, do policy makers acknowledge error. Ex parte Quirin is a reminder about the need for balance between rights and liberties in the context of war-time.

11 citations

Book ChapterDOI
01 Jan 2020
TL;DR: In this article, the authors place the concept in a comparative perspective by surveying the legal position in the three studied jurisdictions and attempt to draw important comparative lessons, which are also likely to impact constitutional decision-making in India and some of its neighboring jurisdictions.
Abstract: This chapter is a comprehensive treatment of the subject. The most important comparative finding of this chapter is the total lack of any comparable legal concept in India and the consequent inevitable conceptual confusion surrounding this phrase. Again, the chapter places the concept in a comparative perspective by surveying the legal position in the three studied jurisdictions and attempts to draw important comparative lessons. These are also likely to impact constitutional decision-making in India and some of its neighboring jurisdictions.