US Constitution. An evaluation on the aftermath of September 11th needs to be under review to establish civil liberties are defended. Since the constitution was adopted it has been central to whether the US constitution meets the terms and defends civi

It appears that the US constitution has been effective during times of heightened concerns about homeland security. Since the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001, the United States government under George Bush has highlighted homeland security as one of his government’s top priorities, and thus new legislation has been implemented to fight terrorism along with the corresponding war in Iraq.  One such legislation is the USA Patriot Act (24 October 2001).  The purpose of this legislation is to provide law enforcement with enhanced tactics to aid in deterring and prosecuting terrorist acts.  Despite not mentioned within the constitution, laws in which are passed by the president have the same effect as laws passed within Congress.  In the past during times of heightened concerns steps were needed to protect the US liberty for example during Lincoln’s time the suspension of habeas corpus during the Civil War.  This was supported by Congress at the time, but was then restored at the end of the Civil War. Franklin Roosevelt used executive orders in 1933 to close all American banks and force the public to turn in their gold coins. However the constitution re-asserts itself as the crisis subsidies during Hamdan vs. Rumsfeld and Boumediene vs. Bush the Supreme Court ruled that the detainees were entitled to constitutional protection.

However, some people argue that this relies on the Supreme Court stepping in to reverse the trend against civil liberties, and groups such as the ACLU have suggested that they tend to be too deferential to governments; especially within times of national crisis this was seen during World War II, the Japanese Americans lost their freedom. This policy came into place from an executive order, was then upheld by the Supreme Court in the case of Korematsu. This case took a long period of time to be resolved, consequently the government then apologized for this violation of civil liberties and 1.6 billion dollars of reparation was paid to their descendants. The court here sided with the President and against the civil liberties of the Japanese Americans. The ACLU however argued that the decision for Bush to declare war was a breach on the Fifth Amendment’s constitution protection that any evidence put against a suspect should be reviewed independently to ensure that before the suspect is put on trial.  They also argue that Bush was taking over judicial responsibilities therefore breaches the separation of power. The Republican majority in Congress responded to the Hamdan Verdict when it passed the Military Commissions Act. Then in the case of Boumedine vs. Bush, the Supreme Court then ruled that the Military Act was unconstitutional as it failed to guarantee a fair trial to suspects.  

Then there is the view that the Constitution fails to protect civil liberties. In the past the suspensions of civil liberties such which have been mentioned above are increasingly permanment and expansive. Buish has created a War on Terror, with a permanment state of emergency(using colour-coded security warnings) to justify