Ulteriori informazioni
The book analyzes the U.S. Supreme Court's rulings in cases concerning
surveillance, both domestic and foreign intelligence, focusing on
how judicial activism or judicial restraint has legitimized the almost
uncontrolled surveillance of American citizens by government agencies.
The purpose of the research is to examine the judiciary's impact
on the scope of government surveillance and, more broadly, on the
state of American democracy and the rule of law. By reviewing the
most important SCOTUS opinions on surveillance and applying the
famous "legitimate end" approach from McCulloch v. Maryland, the
author determines which values have prevailed in the judicial interpretation
of the Constitution: security or freedom. Furthermore, the book
evaluates the legal and political arguments used by the Court to justify
broad surveillance measures, including the national security paradigm
and secrecy, which have strengthened the executive branch's position
in the U.S. governmental system.
Sommario
Introduction: Surveillance as Governance - Chapter One McCulloch v. Maryland and the
Legitimate End Approach - Chapter Two The Fourth Amendment and Domestic
Surveillance - Chapter Three The National Security Paradigm in SCOTUS Surveillance Adjudication - Chapter Four The Legitimization of Surveillance - Epilogue: The Illusion of Transparency - Bibliography - Index
Info autore
Pawe¿ Laidler is Professor of political science at the Jagiellonian
University in Krakow, Poland, and an expert in American studies and
law. He has written books and articles on U.S. constitutionalism, the
judicialization of politics, federal election campaigns, and surveillance.
Laidler has also been a visiting scholar and researcher at American and
European universities, including the Catholic University of America,
SDSU, and Freie Universität Berlin.
