The September 11, 2001, attacks inevitably marked a change in the United States counterterrorism approach adopted up to that point. From the Bush presidency until the current Biden presidency, a series of counterterrorism legislations have been amended. The primary purpose of which has been to ensure the national security of the United States, often at the expense of constitutional guarantees and basic human rights protections. Analysing what remains today of the legislative structure built after 9/11 events is the goal of the following thesis project. The U.S. legal system was altered to justify a certain type of acts, including the opening of the Guantanamo detention center still in place today. The location was strategically chosen as a place where the U.S. administration was free to perpetuate torture, among other human rights violations, without being subject to domestic or even external jurisdiction. It was deemed as a "legal black hole". This was made possible through constitutional maneuvers based on extraterritoriality. However, doing rules tempering is not without consequences. It does indeed result in having permanent legislation that is difficult to remove, despite changing events and exigencies. Twenty-one years after the events of 9/11, the threats to U.S. security are very different. As such, many questions remain about the direction that will be taken in enacting new counterterrorism legislation and whether the same mistakes of the past will be repeated.
The September 11, 2001, attacks inevitably marked a change in the United States counterterrorism approach adopted up to that point. From the Bush presidency until the current Biden presidency, a series of counterterrorism legislations have been amended. The primary purpose of which has been to ensure the national security of the United States, often at the expense of constitutional guarantees and basic human rights protections. Analysing what remains today of the legislative structure built after 9/11 events is the goal of the following thesis project. The U.S. legal system was altered to justify a certain type of acts, including the opening of the Guantanamo detention center still in place today. The location was strategically chosen as a place where the U.S. administration was free to perpetuate torture, among other human rights violations, without being subject to domestic or even external jurisdiction. It was deemed as a "legal black hole". This was made possible through constitutional maneuvers based on extraterritoriality. However, doing rules tempering is not without consequences. It does indeed result in having permanent legislation that is difficult to remove, despite changing events and exigencies. Twenty-one years after the events of 9/11, the threats to U.S. security are very different. As such, many questions remain about the direction that will be taken in enacting new counterterrorism legislation and whether the same mistakes of the past will be repeated.
The legacy of antiterrorism legislation enacted by the United States after 9/11. Human rights violations and the case of Guantánamo
VOLPE, SERENA
2021/2022
Abstract
The September 11, 2001, attacks inevitably marked a change in the United States counterterrorism approach adopted up to that point. From the Bush presidency until the current Biden presidency, a series of counterterrorism legislations have been amended. The primary purpose of which has been to ensure the national security of the United States, often at the expense of constitutional guarantees and basic human rights protections. Analysing what remains today of the legislative structure built after 9/11 events is the goal of the following thesis project. The U.S. legal system was altered to justify a certain type of acts, including the opening of the Guantanamo detention center still in place today. The location was strategically chosen as a place where the U.S. administration was free to perpetuate torture, among other human rights violations, without being subject to domestic or even external jurisdiction. It was deemed as a "legal black hole". This was made possible through constitutional maneuvers based on extraterritoriality. However, doing rules tempering is not without consequences. It does indeed result in having permanent legislation that is difficult to remove, despite changing events and exigencies. Twenty-one years after the events of 9/11, the threats to U.S. security are very different. As such, many questions remain about the direction that will be taken in enacting new counterterrorism legislation and whether the same mistakes of the past will be repeated.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
Volpe_Serena.pdf
accesso riservato
Dimensione
1.4 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
1.4 MB | Adobe PDF |
The text of this website © Università degli studi di Padova. Full Text are published under a non-exclusive license. Metadata are under a CC0 License
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12608/33028