St. Thomas Law Review
First Page
180
Document Type
Article
Abstract
The relationship between security, law, and public policy, generally speaking, is one fraught with tension. This is the case, in part, because security has the potential for limitless application. During the campaign and since taking office, candidate (and later President) Trump clearly espoused an emphasis on security in order to "Make America Great Again." Securitization measures from a political, economic, sociocultural, and foreign policy perspective were key pillars of President Trump's campaign and have informed Executive policy-making since Trump assumed office. In the present highly contentious political environment, wherein the Executive has vigorously articulated and pursued an expansive sociopolitical and economic agenda that is tinctured with security, it is timely to critically examine the nexus between security, law, and public policy vis-a-vis terrorism. The nexus between the latter is the focus of this work. More specifically, this article provides a select comparative analysis of U.S. and E.U. law as it pertains to the aforementioned nexus and international terrorism. Comparative analysis of international terrorism law yields valuable insight into the politicized nature of law and security. A comparative analysis of international terrorism law sheds light on the cultural, ideological, and political dimensions that inform policy and practice. The use of law, the factors that influence its postulation, e.g., culture, history, and politics, presents a working case study of assessing the efficacy of different approaches to and interpretations of national security.
Recommended Citation
Marvin L. Astrada,
Security, Law & Public Policy - Assessing the Efficacy of a National Security vs. Law Enforcement Model to Combat Terrorism,
30
St. Thomas L. Rev.
180
(2018).
Available at:
https://scholarship.stu.edu/stlr/vol30/iss2/3