test Browse by Author Names Browse by Titles of Works Browse by Subjects of Works Browse by Issue Dates of Works

Advanced Search
& Collections
Issue Date   
Sign on to:   
Receive email
My Account
authorized users
Edit Profile   
About T-Space   

T-Space at The University of Toronto Libraries >
School of Graduate Studies - Theses >
Master >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1807/25515

Title: A Comparative Constitutional Analysis of the Judicial Treatment of Torture Between Israel and the United States: Navigating the Contentious Issue of Legality vs Policy in National Security Matters
Authors: Willschick, Elliott
Advisor: Weinrib, Lorraine
Department: Law
Keywords: Terrorism
national security
Supreme Court
Issue Date: 30-Dec-2010
Abstract: This comparative legal analysis evaluates the issue of terrorism and how it has been dealt with respectively by the United States and Israeli Supreme Courts. Since the events of 9/11, combating terrorism has become one of the primary concerns of the US government while it is a matter that has pervaded Israeli policy since its birth as a nation-state. The analysis is centered on examining how each state‘s Supreme Court has confronted the issue with the Israeli Supreme Court using a ―Business as Usual‖ model and the US taking an ―Emergency Powers‖ approach. It is argued that terrorism is an ongoing issue that cannot be justified as an emergency and the US Court would do better in adopting Israel‘s method of adjudication in these matters. It is also suggested that the US could learn from Israel‘s policy towards torture as the US policy has largely been cruel and unsuccessful.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/1807/25515
Appears in Collections:Master
Faculty of Law - Master theses

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormat
Willschick_Elliott_F_201011_LLM_Thesis.pdf593.05 kBAdobe PDF

Items in T-Space are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.