Human rights violations after 9/11 and the role of constitutional constraints

B.V.G. Goderis, M. Versteeg

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

12 Citations (Scopus)


After 9/11, the United States and its allies took measures to protect their citizens from future terrorist attacks. While these measures aim to increase security, they have often been criticized for violating human rights. But violating rights is difficult in a constitutional democracy with separated powers and checks and balances. This paper empirically investigates the effect of the post-9/11 terror threat on human rights. We find strong evidence of a systematic increase in rights violations in the United States and its ally countries after 9/11. When testing the importance of checks and balances, we find that this increase is significantly smaller in countries with independent judicial review (countermajoritarian checks) but did not depend on the presence of veto players in the legislative branch (majoritarian checks). These findings have important implications for constitutional debates on rights protection in times of emergency
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)131-164
JournalThe Journal of Legal Studies
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 2012


Dive into the research topics of 'Human rights violations after 9/11 and the role of constitutional constraints'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this