Miscarriages of Justice in the War Against Terror

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Miscarriages of Justice in the War Against Terror Volume 109 Issue 4 Dickinson Law Review - Volume 109, 2004-2005 3-1-2005 Miscarriages of Justice in the War Against Terror Kent Roach Gary Trotter Follow this and additional works at: https://ideas.dickinsonlaw.psu.edu/dlra Recommended Citation Kent Roach & Gary Trotter, Miscarriages of Justice in the War Against Terror, 109 DICK. L. REV. 967 (2005). Available at: https://ideas.dickinsonlaw.psu.edu/dlra/vol109/iss4/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews at Dickinson Law IDEAS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dickinson Law Review by an authorized editor of Dickinson Law IDEAS. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Miscarriages of Justice in the War Against Terror Kent Roach and Gary Trotter* I. Introduction Although much has been written since the September 11 terrorist attacks about how far states should go in combating terrorism, much less has been written about the risks of harming the innocent in the war against terror. Indeed, the very metaphor of a war against terror suggests a willingness to accept some collateral damage.' Reduction of the freedom of citizens is typically cited as the most common form of collateral damage, and much of the debate about anti-terrorism measures has revolved around threats to civil liberties. 2 In this paper, we will begin to examine how various anti-terrorism measures taken in a number of countries may increase the risk of another type of collateral damage- miscarriages of justice. In addition, we will explore the significance of the war against terror for what is classified as a miscarriage of justice. In particular, recent American anti-terrorism efforts-such as the detention of enemy combatants at Guantanamo Bay, the use of detention under immigration laws, the detention of people under material witness * Of the Faculties of Law, University of Toronto and Queens University (Kingston) respectively. This paper is part of a larger and on-going comparative study of miscarriages of justice. The financial assistance of Canada's Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council is gratefully acknowledged. Thanks also to Rayner Thwaites for excellent comments on an earlier draft of this article, as well as the participants in Russ Weaver's Criminal Procedure Forum held in Louisville in November, 2004, and the University of Minnesota's Law School seminar series in January, 2005. As this article was being completed, Professor Dianne Martin, who was a pioneer in Canada for the study of and advocacy against wrongful convictions, unexpectedly passed away. Her death leaves a large hole and we respectfully dedicate this article to her memory. 1. For an epidemiological study estimating close to 100,000 additional deaths in post-invasion Iraq, see Les Roberts et al., Mortality Before and After the 2003 Invasion of Iraq: Cluster Sample Survey, LANCET, Oct. 29, 2004, at http://image.thelancet.com/ extras/04art I0342web.pdf. 2. See, e.g., the creation of a Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board in § 1061 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, Pub. L. No. 108-458 §§ 7211-14 (2004). PENN STATE LAW REVIEW [Vol. 109:4 warrants, and the designation of American citizens as enemy combatants-raise the issue of whether the conceptualization of miscarriages of justice as the wrongful criminal conviction of the factually innocent is too narrow. That is, should deprivations of liberty short of the criminal conviction of those who are innocent under the relevant law be classified and studied as miscarriages of justice? Can concerns about the punishment of the innocent be applied to immigration and military laws that employ detention as a preventive measure? How does the context of the war on terrorism inform the debate about what is a miscarriage of justice and the efforts that are necessary to minimize the risk of miscarriages of justice? The British experience with wrongful convictions in the Birmingham Six, the Maguire Seven, the Guildford Four and the Judith Ward cases provides dramatic evidence about the danger of convicting the innocent as a response to terrible acts of terrorism. Wrongful convictions in all cases are corrosive to the integrity of the justice system, but they are particularly corrosive in terrorism cases. As in the so-called Irish cases in the United Kingdom, miscarriages of justice may be taken as a partial affirmation of some of the political or other grievances of the terrorists. This is particularly so if democracies that claim to abide by the rule of law and equal rights and justice for all do not live up to these ideals when they are threatened by terrorism. The temptation of departing from normal legal standards and engaging in pre- judgment, prejudice, and stereotyping may be particularly high in emotive and devastating cases involving allegations of terrorism and fears of continued acts of terrorism. The need to maintain legal standards of fair treatment and to ensure the just and accurate determination of individual responsibility are particularly important if democracies are to maintain the high ground in their fight against terrorists. The punishment of the guilty, and only the guilty, is one of the important distinctions between the force that a democracy should use to defend itself against terrorists and the force that terrorists themselves use. 3 In addition, the risk of wrongful convictions in terrorism cases, both before and after 9/11, are likely to fall disproportionately on particular groups, such as racial and religious minorities, or those with radical political views. Thus, even if you accept 3. Section 102(a)(3) of the USA Patriot Act, Pub. L. No. 107-56, 115 Stat. 272, 276 (2001), includes a finding of Congress that "the concept of individual responsibility for wrongdoing is sacrosanct in American society, and applies equally to all religious, racial and ethnic groups." On the sometimes fine distinctions between terrorism and counterterrorism, see Laura Donohue, Terrorism and Counterterrorist Discourse, in GLOBAL ANTI-TERRORISM LAW AND POLICY (V. Ramraj, M. Hor & K. Roach eds. (forthcoming)). 2005] MISCARRIAGES OF JUSTICE IN THE WAR AGAINST TERROR 969 that the risk of wrongful convictions can never be reduced to zero, there may be a special case4 for taking additional precautions to reduce this risk in terrorism cases. In the first part of this paper, we review the experience of wrongful convictions in terrorism cases, with special attention to the so-called Irish cases of the Birmingham Six, the Maguire Seven, the Guildford Four, and Judith Ward, who were all wrongfully convicted of IRA bombings. These cases provide evidence of the many pressures that may be brought to bear on the criminal justice system in high profile and emotive terrorism cases. For example, they demonstrate how police misconduct can generate false confessions and false evidence that is used against others thought to be connected with a terrorist cell. They reveal the effect that tunnel vision can have on those who prosecute terrorism cases, including supposedly objective forensic scientists, judges, and juries. These cases also reveal how a common factor in wrongful convictions- the failure of the state to make full disclosures of information to the accused-can be a special risk in complex terrorism cases where the state is reluctant to disclose information that may affect national security. We also examine how broad criminal laws relating to terrorism, including new post 9/11 anti-terrorism criminal laws, executive designation of terrorists and terrorist groups, and reliance on circumstantial evidence may encourage a process of guilt by association that may run the risk of convicting the factually innocent. We conclude that the above factors, as well as the pressure to reassure the public after a terrible act of terrorism, generate real risks that factually innocent people, especially innocent associates of terrorists, may be charged and perhaps wrongfully convicted of terrorism. As in the Irish cases, such wrongful convictions, if eventually discovered, will shake the public's confidence in the criminal justice system and be seen as an affirmation of state discrimination against those who may share political beliefs, national or ethnic origins, and/or the same religion as the terrorists. Despite the above risks of wrongful convictions in terrorism cases, we are not able to point to specific examples of confirmed or suspected wrongful convictions since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. In Germany and the United States, prosecutions of those alleged to have participated in the September 11 plot have been thwarted or stalled because of an unwillingness to disclose intelligence sources to the accused. Lack of full disclosure was a significant cause of wrongful convictions in the Irish cases, and insistence on disclosure is an important safeguard against future wrongful convictions. At the same 4. RONALD DwoRKN, A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE 88 (1985); Ronald Dworkin, The Threat to Patriotism.NEW YORK REV. OF BOOKS. Feb. 28. 2002. PENN STATE LAW REVIEW [Vol. 109:4 time, the due process requirements of the criminal trial have placed considerable pressure on many states to use less restrained alternatives to the criminal law. The less restrained alternatives include the use of military power, immigration laws, and other laws that are not designed to punish the guilty.5 In the second part of this paper, we will examine some of these alternatives to criminal prosecutions to determine whether concerns about miscarriages
Recommended publications
  • Representations and Discourse of Torture in Post 9/11 Television: an Ideological Critique of 24 and Battlestar Galactica
    REPRESENTATIONS AND DISCOURSE OF TORTURE IN POST 9/11 TELEVISION: AN IDEOLOGICAL CRITIQUE OF 24 AND BATTLSTAR GALACTICA Michael J. Lewis A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS May 2008 Committee: Jeffrey Brown, Advisor Becca Cragin ii ABSTRACT Jeffrey Brown Advisor Through their representations of torture, 24 and Battlestar Galactica build on a wider political discourse. Although 24 began production on its first season several months before the terrorist attacks, the show has become a contested space where opinions about the war on terror and related political and military adventures are played out. The producers of Battlestar Galactica similarly use the space of television to raise questions and problematize issues of war. Together, these two television shows reference a long history of discussion of what role torture should play not just in times of war but also in a liberal democracy. This project seeks to understand the multiple ways that ideological discourses have played themselves out through representations of torture in these television programs. This project begins with a critique of the popular discourse of torture as it portrayed in the popular news media. Using an ideological critique and theories of televisual realism, I argue that complex representations of torture work to both challenge and reify dominant and hegemonic ideas about what torture is and what it does. This project also leverages post-structural analysis and critical gender theory as a way of understanding exactly what ideological messages the programs’ producers are trying to articulate.
    [Show full text]
  • Inspiring Americans to Greatness Attendees of the 2019 Freedom Conference Raise Their Hands in Solidarity with Hong Kong Pro-Democracy Protesters
    Annual Report 2019-20 Inspiring Americans to Greatness Attendees of the 2019 Freedom Conference raise their hands in solidarity with Hong Kong pro-democracy protesters The principles espoused by The Steamboat Institute are: Limited taxation and fiscal responsibility • Limited government • Free market capitalism Individual rights and responsibilities • Strong national defense Contents INTRODUCTION EMERGING LEADERS COUNCIL About the Steamboat Institute 2 Meet Our Emerging Leaders 18 Letter from the Chairman 3 MEDIA COVERAGE AND OUTREACH AND EVENTS PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT Campus Liberty Tour 4 Media Coverage 20 Freedom Conferences and Film Festival 8 Social Media Analytics 21 Additional Outreach 10 FINANCIALS TONY BLANKLEY FELLOWSHIP 2019-20 Revenue & Expenses 22 FOR PUBLIC POLICY & AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM FUNDING About the Tony Blankley Fellowship 11 2019 and 2020 Fellows 12 Funding Sources 23 Past Fellows 14 MEET OUR PEOPLE COURAGE IN EDUCATION AWARD Board of Directors 24 Recipients 16 National Advisory Board 24 Our Team 24 The Steamboat Institute 2019-20 Annual Report – 1 – About The Steamboat Institute Here at the Steamboat Institute, we are Defenders of Freedom When we started The Steamboat Institute in 2008, it was and Advocates of Liberty. We are admirers of the bravery out of genuine concern for the future of our country. We take and rugged individualism that has made this country great. seriously the concept that freedom is never more than one We are admirers of the greatness and wisdom that resides generation away from extinction. in every individual. We understand that this is a great nation because of its people, not because of its government. The Steamboat Institute has succeeded beyond anything Like Thomas Jefferson, we would rather be, “exposed to we could have imagined when we started in 2008.
    [Show full text]
  • Antipodal Invective: a Field Gude to Kangaroos in American Courtrooms Parker B
    The University of Akron IdeaExchange@UAkron Akron Law Review Akron Law Journals July 2015 Antipodal Invective: A Field Gude to Kangaroos in American Courtrooms Parker B. Potter Jr. Please take a moment to share how this work helps you through this survey. Your feedback will be important as we plan further development of our repository. Follow this and additional works at: http://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview Part of the Judges Commons Recommended Citation Potter, Parker B. Jr. (2006) "Antipodal Invective: A Field Gude to Kangaroos in American Courtrooms," Akron Law Review: Vol. 39 : Iss. 1 , Article 4. Available at: http://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview/vol39/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Akron Law Journals at IdeaExchange@UAkron, the institutional repository of The nivU ersity of Akron in Akron, Ohio, USA. It has been accepted for inclusion in Akron Law Review by an authorized administrator of IdeaExchange@UAkron. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Potter: Kangaroo Courts POTTER1.DOC 3/20/2006 9:16:14 AM ANTIPODAL INVECTIVE: A FIELD GUIDE TO KANGAROOS IN AMERICAN COURTROOMS Parker B. Potter, Jr.* I. INTRODUCTION Antipodes are “[a]ny two places or regions that are on diametrically opposite sides of the earth.”1 Go to the opposite side of the earth from where I sat while drafting this article and you will find, among other things, Australia. Go to Australia, and you will find kangaroos, by the thousands. Go to Westlaw, and you will find kangaroo
    [Show full text]
  • Alan Dershowitz
    Debunking the Newest – and Oldest – Jewish Conspiracy: A Reply to the Mearsheimer-Walt “Working Paper” Alan Dershowitz Harvard Law School April 2006 The author of this paper is solely responsible for the views expressed in it. As an academic institution, Harvard University does not take a position on the scholarship of individual faculty members, and this paper should not be interpreted or portrayed as reflecting the official position of the University or any of its Schools. L:\Research\Sponsored Research\WP RR RAO\WP response paper\Dershowitz.response.paper.doc Words count: 9733 Last printed 4/5/2006 1:13:00 PM Created on 4/5/2006 1:08:00 PM Page 1 of 45 Debunking the Newest – and Oldest – Jewish Conspiracy1: A Reply to the Mearsheimer-Walt “Working Paper” by Alan Dershowitz2 Introduction The publication, on the Harvard Kennedy School web site, of a “working paper,” written by a professor and academic dean at the Kennedy School and a prominent professor at the University of Chicago, has ignited a hailstorm of controversy and raised troubling questions. The paper was written by two self-described foreign-policy “realists,” Professor Stephen Walt and Professor John Mearsheimer.3 It asserts that the Israel “Lobby” – a cabal whose “core” is “American Jews” – has a “stranglehold” on mainstream American media, think tanks, academia, and the government.4 The Lobby is led by the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (“AIPAC”), which the authors characterize as a “de facto agent of a foreign government” that places the interests of that government ahead of the interests of the United States.5 Jewish political contributors use Jewish “money” to blackmail government officials, while “Jewish philanthropists” influence and “police” academic programs and shape public opinion.6 Jewish “congressional staffers” exploit their roles and betray the trust of their bosses by 1 Article citations reference John J.
    [Show full text]
  • The Exceptional Absence of Human Rights As a Principle in American Law
    Pace Law Review Volume 34 Issue 2 Spring 2014 Article 5 April 2014 The Exceptional Absence of Human Rights as a Principle in American Law Mugambi Jouet Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/plr Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, Constitutional Law Commons, Human Rights Law Commons, Jurisprudence Commons, and the Law and Society Commons Recommended Citation Mugambi Jouet, The Exceptional Absence of Human Rights as a Principle in American Law, 34 Pace L. Rev. 688 (2014) Available at: https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/plr/vol34/iss2/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Law at DigitalCommons@Pace. It has been accepted for inclusion in Pace Law Review by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Pace. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Exceptional Absence of Human Rights as a Principle in American Law Mugambi Jouet* I. Introduction References to “human rights” are rare in American civil or criminal cases, including those addressing fundamental questions of justice. In the United States, human rights often evoke abuses faced by people in Third World dictatorships. In other words, human rights commonly refer to foreign problems, not domestic ones. The relative absence of human rights as a concept in American law is peculiar by international standards, as human rights play a far greater role in the domestic systems of other Western democracies. This Article begins with a survey of references to “human rights” in landmark Supreme Court cases concerning racial segregation, the death penalty, prisoners’ rights, women’s rights, children’s rights, gay rights, and the indefinite detention of alleged terrorists during the “War on Terror.” The survey reveals that even liberal Justices seldom or never invoked “human rights” in these cases.
    [Show full text]
  • Winter 2002 Volume 21 INSIDE: New York to Mutts: “You’Re Worthless” See Page 3
    Winter 2002 Volume 21 INSIDE: New York to Mutts: “You’re Worthless” See Page 3 THE QUARTERLY NEWSLETTER OF THE ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND Darwin, Meet Dershowitz Courting legal evolution at Harvard Law ights,” declared Alan Dershowitz, pacing the floor of a lecture hall at Harvard Law School, “grow out of wrongs.” “ It seemed the type of pronounce- Rment Dershowitz, who teaches law at Harvard, might deliver during a typical lecture to one of his classes. But this was no typical lecture, and the Ames Courtroom in Austin Hall bore only a passing resemblance to The Paper Chase. The scene was a first-of-its-kind symposium, “The Evolving Legal Status of Chimpanzees.” And Dershowitz’s featured role signaled how far the idea of legal rights for animals has come since the PHOTO BY NANCY O’BRIEN 1970s, when the fictional Professor Kingsfield did his blustery best to stem the tide of change at Harvard and beyond. Harvard Law School today boasts one of the most active chapters of the Student Animal Legal Defense Fund in the nation. The chapter co-spon- sored the daylong symposium with the Chim- panzee Collaboratory, a consortium of attorneys, scientists and public-policy experts of which sionate to those on whom we impose our rules. Still a “legal thing”— ALDF is a charter member. The symposium was Hence the argument for animal rights.” but for how long? moderated by ALDF President Steve Ann Cham- With his fellow legal scholars Laurence Tribe bers, chair of the Collaboratory’s legal committee (who was scheduled to speak at the symposium, and the primary organizer of the event.
    [Show full text]
  • Council of Conservative Citizens
    Council of Conservative Citizens Name: Council of Conservative Citizens Type of Organization: Not-for-profit political Ideologies and Affiliations: Far-right homophobic racist white supremacist white nationalist Place of Origin: Atlanta, Georgia Year of Origin: 1985 Founder(s): Gordon Baum (deceased) Places of Operation: St. Louis, Missouri (headquarters); United States Overview Executive Summary: The Council of Conservative Citizens (CCC) is a U.S. not-for-profit organization with a white supremacist and anti-homosexual agenda. The group bills itself as the “only serious nationwide activist group that sticks up for white rights!”1 The CCC grew out of the anti-integration White Citizens’ Councils, also known as the Citizens Councils of America (CCA), which steadily declined in popularity during the 1970s and 1980s.2 In 1985, workers’ compensation attorney and former CCA Midwest field director Gordon Baum and a group of 30 white men created the CCC in Atlanta, Georgia as a successor organization to the CCA.3 At its height in the 1990s, the CCC included some 15,000 members nationwide. 4 The CCC holds protests, rallies, and other events to advocate a white, Christian, and European America. The CCC believes the U.S. government “must reflect Christian beliefs and values” and mass immigration of “non-European and non-Western people” is endangering the United States’ European character.5 The CCC’s website highlights news and claims to educate about so-called “black-on-white violent crime, and in particular, the seemingly endless incidents involving
    [Show full text]
  • Constructing Campus Conflict, Appendices
    Challenging the Right, Advancing Social Justice CONSTRUCTING CAMPUS CONFLICT Antisemitism and Islamophobia on U.S. College Campuses, 2007-2011 2007-2011: Appendices Senior Editor Chip Berlet Managing Editor Debra Cash Associate Editor Maria Planansky Political Research Associates (PRA) is a social justice think tank devoted to supporting movements that are building a more just and inclusive democratic society. We expose movements, institutions, and ideologies that undermine human rights. Copyright ©2014, Political Research Associates Political Research Associates 1310 Broadway, Suite 201 Somerville, MA 02144-1837 www.politicalresearch.org design by rachelle galloway-popotas, owl in a tree CONTENTS SURVEY OF MSA STUDENTS ................................................................................................................. 4 ISLAMO-FACISM AWARENESS WEEK (IFAW) 2007 ......................................................................... 7 TRAUMA AND PREJUDICE ................................................................................................................... 10 ADL AND THE PARK51 CONTROVERSY ......................................................................................... 12 RENE GIRARD AND MIMETIC SCAPEGOATING ............................................................................. 13 BIBLIOGRAPHIES ......................................................................................................................................15 Selected LIST OF INCIDENTS DESCRIBED AS ANTISEMITIC ...........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Guest Date Program Label Lance Bass 10/4/2010 Larry King
    Guest Date Program Label Lance Bass 10/4/2010 Larry King Democrat/Liberal Wanda Sykes 10/4/2010 Larry King Democrat/Liberal Kathy Griffin 10/4/2010 Larry King Democrat/Liberal Andrew Breitbart 10/4/2010 Parker Spitzer Republican/Conservative Will Cain 10/4/2010 Parker Spitzer Republican/Conservative Aaron Sorkin 10/4/2010 Parker Spitzer Democrat/Liberal Ari Melber 10/4/2010 Parker Spitzer Democrat/Liberal Elizabeth Warren 10/4/2010 Parker Spitzer Democrat/Liberal Tom Frank 10/4/2010 Parker Spitzer Democrat/Liberal Tom Prichard 10/5/2010 AC 360 Republican/Conservative Alan Grayson 10/5/2010 AC 360 Democrat/Liberal Dick Armey 10/5/2010 Parker Spitzer Republican/Conservative Reihan Salam 10/5/2010 Parker Spitzer Republican/Conservative Dave Zirin 10/5/2010 Parker Spitzer Democrat/Liberal Katrina Vanden Heuvel 10/5/2010 Parker Spitzer Democrat/Liberal Oliver Stone 10/5/2010 Parker Spitzer Democrat/Liberal Doris Kearns Goodwin 10/5/2010 Parker Spitzer Democrat/Liberal Errol Louis 10/5/2010 Parker Spitzer Democrat/Liberal Dana Loesch 10/6/2010 AC 360 Republican/Conservative Marc Lamont Hill 10/6/2010 AC 360 Democrat/Liberal Dinesh D'Souza 10/6/2010 Parker Spitzer Republican/Conservative Michael Gerson 10/6/2010 Parker Spitzer Republican/Conservative Fareed Zakaria 10/6/2010 Parker Spitzer Democrat/Liberal Sam Seder 10/6/2010 Parker Spitzer Democrat/Liberal Steve Kornacki 10/6/2010 Parker Spitzer Democrat/Liberal Simon Schama 10/6/2010 Parker Spitzer Democrat/Liberal Ed Rollins 10/7/2010 AC 360 Republican/Conservative Billy Nungesser 10/7/2010
    [Show full text]
  • Read It Here
    Case 1:21-cv-21961-CMA Document 42 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/02/2021 Page 1 of 38 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 21-21961-CIV-ALTONAGA/Torres ALAN DERSHOWITZ, Plaintiff, v. NETFLIX, INC., LEROY & MORTON PRODUCTIONS LLC, RADICALMEDIA LLC, LISA BRYANT and JOSEPH BERLINGER, Defendants. / ANSWER ANDDeadline COUNTERCLAIM OF DEFENDANT NETFLIX, INC. Defendant Netflix, Inc. (“Netflix”), by and through its undersigned counsel, hereby files its Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiff Alan Dershowitz’s (“Dershowitz”) Amended Complaint (the “Amended Complaint”) using the same headings and paragraph numbering employed by Dershowitz and asserts its own Counterclaim against Dershowitz. ANSWER OF DEFENDANT NETFLIX, INC. RESPONSE TO THE NATURE OF THIS ACTION 1. Netflix admits that this purports to be an action for defamation, breach of contract, promissory estoppel, and fraudulent inducement arising out of the documentary series Filthy Rich, which first became available on Netflix on May 27, 2020 but denies that Dershowitz is entitled to any relief in this action. 2. Netflix denies each and every allegation in Paragraph 2 of the Amended Complaint. RESPONSE TO THE PARTIES 3. Netflix lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the allegations in Paragraph 3 of the Amended Complaint and, on that basis, denies each and every Case 1:21-cv-21961-CMA Document 42 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/02/2021 Page 2 of 38 allegation in Paragraph 3 and demands strict proof of Plaintiff’s citizenship. 4. Netflix admits that it is an American technology and media company incorporated in Delaware and headquartered in California.
    [Show full text]
  • (E)Racing the Fourth Amendment
    Michigan Law Review Volume 100 Issue 5 2002 (E)racing the Fourth Amendment Devon W. Carbado UCLA School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr Part of the Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons, Criminal Procedure Commons, Fourth Amendment Commons, Law and Race Commons, and the Supreme Court of the United States Commons Recommended Citation Devon W. Carbado, (E)racing the Fourth Amendment, 100 MICH. L. REV. 946 (2002). Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol100/iss5/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Michigan Law Review at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Michigan Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. (E)RACING THE FOURTH AMENDMENT Devon W. Carbado* PROLOGUE: NOTES OF A NATURALIZED SON (OR HOW I BECAME A BLACK AMERICAN) ................................................. 947 I. INTRODUCTION... .......................................................................... 964 " II. RACE AND THE "FREE TO LEAVE TEST .................................. 974 A. Introduction ........................................................................... 974 B. A Racial Re-Reading of Florida v. Bostick ........................ 975 1. The Racial Facts .............................................................. 975 2. Racial Vulnerability to Police Encounters .................... 976 C.
    [Show full text]
  • Abolition Constitutionalism Contents
    VOLUME 133 NOVEMBER 2019 NUMBER 1 © 2019 by The Harvard Law Review Association THE SUPREME COURT 2018 TERM FOREWORD: ABOLITION CONSTITUTIONALISM Dorothy E. Roberts CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 3 I. THE NEW ABOLITIONISTS .................................................................................................. 11 A. The Prison Industrial Complex and the Carceral State ............................................... 12 B. Abolition Praxis: Past, Present, Future .......................................................................... 19 1. Slavery Origins .............................................................................................................. 19 (a) Police ....................................................................................................................... 20 (b) Prisons ..................................................................................................................... 29 (c) Death Penalty ......................................................................................................... 38 2. Not a Malfunction. ....................................................................................................... 42 3. A Society Without Prisons. ......................................................................................... 43 C. The Unfinished Abolition Struggle .................................................................................
    [Show full text]