Abstract
Since September 11, 2001, a significant portion of the public policy in the United States has focused upon the threat of terrorism. Following the attacks, the need for increased attention to counterterrorism resulted in substantial allocations of public funding toward these initiatives. Yet, researchers conducting systematic reviews of the literature surrounding counterterrorism strategies have suggested that very few rigorous evaluations of such strategies actually exist, despite these substantial expenditures (Journal of Experimental Criminology 2:489–516, 2006). Even more surprisingly, this shortage of evaluation research persists despite the considerable amount of scholarly attention focused on the topic of terrorism. An example of this can be seen with respect to the numerous legal issues surrounding terror prevention. Post-9/11 legal issues have often taken center stage within policy debates regarding terrorism; some examples include the legality and propriety of interrogation methods, indefinite detentions, wiretapping, and numerous other issues of legal policy. However, while legal scholars have energetically published doctrinal analyses of these issues, few empirical studies related to legal issues have been conducted and even fewer of these can be called evaluations. Thus, this chapter explores the empirical literature related to law and terrorism. Following this, suggestions for areas of research that would benefit from a more detailed investigation are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Althaus, S. L. (2002). American news consumption during times of national crisis. PS: Political Science and Politics, 35, 517–521.
Bobo, L., & Licari, F. C. (1989). Education and political tolerance: Testing the effects of cognitive sophistication and target group effect. Public Opinion Quarterly, 53, 285–308.
Chamberlain, R., & Haider-Markel, D. P. (2005). “Lien on me”: State policy innovation in response to paper terrorism. Political Research Quarterly, 58(3), 449–460.
Clark, T. S. (2006). Judicial decision making during wartime. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 3, 397–419.
Clayton, C., & Gillman, H. (Eds.). (1998). Supreme Court decision-making: New institutionalist approaches. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Davis, J. A. (1975). Communism, conformity, cohorts, categories: American tolerance in 1954 and 1972–72. American Journal of Sociology, 81, 491–513.
Davis, D. W. (2007). Negative liberty: Public opinion and the terrorist attacks on America. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Davis, D. W., & Silver, B. D. (2004). Civil liberties vs security: Public opinion in the context of the terrorist attacks on America. American Journal of Political Science, 48, 28–46.
Diamond, S. S., & Rose, M. R. (2005). Real juries. Annual Review of Law and Social Sciences, 1, 255–284.
Ducat, C. R., & Dudley, R. L. (1989). Federal district judges and presidential power during the postwar era. Journal of Politics, 51, 98.
Enders, W., & Sandler, S. (1993). The effectiveness of antiterrorism policies: A vector-autoregression-intervention analysis. The American Political Science Review, 87(4), 829–844.
Epstein, L., Ho, D., King, G., & Segal, J. (2005). The effect of war on the Supreme Court. New York University Law Review, 8, 1.
Epstein, L., & Knight, J. (1998). The choices justices make. Washington: CQ Press.
Gibson, J. L. (1987). Homosexuals and the Ku Klux Klan: A contextual analysis of political tolerance. Western Political Quarterly, 40, 427–448.
Gibson, J. L., & Gouws, A. (2003). Overcoming intolerance in South Africa: Experiments in democratic persuasion. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hadfield, G. K. (2008). Framing the choice between cash and the courthouse: Experiences with the 9/11 victim compensation fund. Law and Society Review, 42(3), 645–683.
Hagan, J., Farrales, G., & Jasso, G. (2008). How law rules: Torture, terror, and the normative judgments of Iraqi judges. Law and Society Review, 42, 605–643.
Hannah, G., Clutterbuck, L., & Rubin, J. (2008). Radicalization or rehabilitation understanding the challenge of extremist and radicalized prisoners. Santa Monica: Rand.
Huddy, L., Feldman, S., Capelos, T., & Provost, C. (2002). The consequences of terrorism: Disentangling the effects of personal and national threat. Political Psychology, 23(3), 485–509.
Huddy, L., Feldman, S., & Taber, C. (2005). Threat, anxiety, and support of antiterrorism policies. American Journal of Political Science, 49, 593–608.
Huq, A. Z., & Muller, C. (2008). The war on crime as precursor to the war on terror. International Journal of Law, Crime, and Justice, 1, 215–229.
Kalyvas, S. N. (2006). The logic of violence in civil war. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kuklinski, J. H., Riggle, E., Ottati, V., Schwarz, N., & Wyer, R. S. (1991). The cognitive and affective bases of political tolerance judgments. American Journal of Political Science, 35, 1–27.
Lawrence, D. G. (1976). Procedural norms and tolerance: A reassessment. American Political Science Review, 70(1), 70–80.
Lum, C., Kennedy, L. W., & Sherley, A. (2006). Are counterterrorism strategies effective? The results of the Campbell systematic review on counterterrorism evaluation research. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 2, 489–516.
Lum, C., Merola, L., Willis-Hibdon, J., & Cave, B. (2010). License plate recognition technology: Impact evaluation and community assessment. Final report for the National Institute of Justice. Retrieved from http://gemini.gmu.edu/cebcp/LPR_FINAL.pdf. Accessed on July 29, 2011.
Maltzman, F., Spriggs, J. F., & Wahlbeck, P. J. (2000). Crafting law on the Supreme Court: The collegial game. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Marcus, G. E., Sullivan, J. L., Theiss-Morse, E., & Wood, S. L. (1995). With malice toward some. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McClosky, H. (1964). Consensus and ideology in American politics. American Political Science Review, 58, 361–382.
McClosky, H., & Brill, A. (1983). Dimensions of tolerance. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
McClosky, H., & Zaller, J. (1984). The American ethos: Public attitudes toward capitalism and democracy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Merola, L. M. (2007). A culture of crisis: Information and the scope of American civil liberties in an era of terrorist threat. Doctoral dissertation. Retrieved from ProQuest Digital Dissertations (publication number AAT 3271064).
Merola, L. M. (2008). Threat, leadership and the discourse of legal elites in the post-9/11 period. Presented at the annual meeting of the Law and Society Association, Montreal, Canada.
Merola, L. M. (2009). Measuring elite opinion on terrorism and civil liberties: A survey of the legal community. Presented at the annual meeting of the Law and Society Association: Denver, Colorado.
Merola, L. M. (2011). Transmitting the threat: Media coverage and the discussion of terrorism and civil liberties since 9/11. Behavioral Sciences of Terrorism and Political Aggression, forthcoming: Washington, D.C.
Merola, L. M., Bonometti, J., Day, M., Ellis, T., Hawkins, L., Khan, K., et al. (2011). The continuing policy demands of counterterrorism: The views of criminal justice professionals. Presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology.
Nelson, T. E., Clawson, R. A., & Oxley, Z. M. (1997). Media framing of a civil liberties controversy and its effect on tolerance. American Political Science Review, 91, 567–584.
Nisbet, E. C., Ostman, R., & Shanahan, J. (2008). Public opinion toward Muslim Americans: Civil liberties and the role of religiosity, ideology, and media use. In A. Sinno (Ed.), Muslim in western politics (pp. 160–199). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Nisbet, E. C., & Shanahan, J. (2004). MSRG special report: Restrictions on civil liberties, views of Islam, and Muslim Americans. Ithaca: Media and Society Research Group, Cornell University, http://www.yuricareport.com/Civil%20Rights/CornellMuslimReportCivilRights.pdf. Accessed on July 29, 2011.
Norris, F., Tracy, M., & Galea, S. (2009). Looking for resilience: Understanding the longitudinal trajectories of responses to stress. Social Science and Medicine, 68, 2190–2198.
Nunn, C. Z., Crockett, H. J., & Williams, J. A. (1978). Tolerance for nonconformity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Pew Res. Cent. People Press. (2001). American psyche reeling from terror attacks. Survey report, September 19. Washington: Pew Research Center. http://people-press.org/2001/09/19/american-psyche-reeling-from-terror-attacks/. Accessed on July 29, 2011.
Pfeffer, J., & Sutton, R. I. (2006). Evidence-based management. Harvard Business Review, 84(1), 63–74.
Pfefferbaum, R. (2009). The role of colleges and universities in building community resilience to disasters. National Social Science Journal, 33, 102–109.
Prothro, J. W., & Grigg, C. M. (1963). Fundamental principles of democracy: Bases of agreement and disagreement. Journal of Politics, 22, 276–294.
Rousseau, D. M. (2006). Is there such a thing as “evidence-based management?”. Academy of Management Review, 31(2), 256–269.
Scheuerman, W. E. (2006). Emergency powers. Annual Review of Law and Social Sciences, 2, 257–277.
Scheufele, D. A., Nisbet, M. C., & Ostman, R. E. (2005). September 11 news coverage, public opinion, and support for civil liberties. Mass Communication & Society, 8, 197–218.
Segal, J. A., & Spaeth, H. J. (2002). The Supreme Court and the attitudinal model. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sniderman, P. M., Tetlock, P. E., Glaser, J. M., Green, D., & Hout, M. (1989). Principled tolerance and the American mass public. British Journal of Political Science, 19, 25–45.
Stouffer, S. (1955). Communism, conformity, and civil liberties. New York: Doubleday.
Sullivan, J. L., & Hendriks, H. (2009). Public support for civil liberties pre- and post-9/11. Annual Review of Law and Social Sciences, 5, 375–391.
Sullivan, J. L., Piereson, J. E., & Marcus, G. E. (1979). An alternative conceptualization of political tolerance: Illusory increases 1950s–1970s. American Political Science Review, 73, 781–794.
Sullivan, J. L., Piereson, J. E., & Marcus, G. E. (1982). Political tolerance and American democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Tyler, T. R., Schulhofer, S., & Huq, A. Z. (2010). Legitimacy and deterrence effects in counterterrorism policing: A study of Muslim Americans. Law and Society Review, 44(2), 365–402.
USA-PATRIOT Act. (1991). Pub. L. No. 107-56, 115 Stat. 272.
Weisburd, D., Feucht, T. E., Hakimi, I., Perry, S., & Mock, L. (Eds.). (2009). To protect and serve: Policing in an age of terrorism. New York: Springer.
Woodford, H. J. (1981). Courts of appeals in the federal judicial system. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Yates, J., & Whitford, A. (1998). Presidential power and the United States Supreme Court. Political Research Quarterly, 51, 539.
Zaller, J. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Merola, L.M. (2012). Evaluating the Legal Challenges and Effects of Counterterrorism Policy. In: Lum, C., Kennedy, L. (eds) Evidence-Based Counterterrorism Policy. Springer Series on Evidence-Based Crime Policy, vol 3. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-0953-3_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-0953-3_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-0952-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-0953-3
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)