Books
National Security Secrecy: Comparative Effects on Democracy and the Rule of Law (Cambridge University Press 2017). This monograph examines the nature and value of the national security-related secrets held by the executive branch juxtaposed with the values of a transparent democracy. It contextualizes the U.S. secrecy regime within different systems used in other democratic nations facing serious security threats.
Editor, Constitutions, Security and the Rule of Law (iDebate/Open Society Foundations 2014). This volume includes comparative perspectives on how national security challenges affect constitutional limits on government power.
Book Chapters
Surveillance and the Inversion of Democratic Transparency, in Leonard Weinberg and Elizabeth Francis, and Eliot Assoudeh, eds., Democracy and Security: A Handbook (Routledge 2021).
Assessing Unconventional Applications of the “Terrorism” Label, in Satvinder S. Juss, ed., Beyond Human Rights and the War on Terror (Routledge 2019).
Neoliberal National Security: Wielding Counterterrorism Powers to Protect Economic Growth, in Sairam Bhat, ed., Privatization and Globalization: Changing Legal Paradigm (National Law School of India University Book Series 2017).
United States Counterterrorism Law in Comparative Counter-Terrorism Law (Kent Roach, ed.) (Cambridge University Press 2015).
Judicial Formalism and the State Secrets Privilege, in Constitutions, Security and the Rule of Law (Sudha Setty, ed.) (iDebate/Open Society Foundations 2014).
Judicial Formalism and the State Secrets Privilege, in Secrecy, National Security and the Vindication of Constitutional Law (David D. Cole, Federico Fabbrini, Arianna Vedaschi, eds.) (Edward Elgar 2013).
Litigating Secrets: Comparative Perspectives on the State Secrets Privilege, in National Security, Civil Liberties and the War on Terror (M. Katherine B. Darmer and Richard D. Fybel, eds.) (Prometheus Books 2011).
Comparative Perspectives on the State Secrets Privilege, in State Secrets Privilege (M. Bhavani, ed.) (Icfai University Press 2009).
Articles
Introduction: Past and Present as Prologue: A Symposium on Richard L. Abel’s Law’s Wars and Law’s Trials, Texas National Security Review (Jan. 2021) (available at https://tnsr.org/roundtable/book-review-roundtable-laws-wars-laws-trials/).
The President’s Private Dictionary: How Secret Definitions Undermine Domestic and Transnational Efforts at Executive Branch Accountability, 24 Ind. J. Global Legal Stud. 513 (2017) (invited symposium submission on The Transnational Executive).
Obama’s National Security Exceptionalism, 91 Chicago-Kent L. Rev. 91 (2016) (invited symposium essay). This Essay considers the Obama administration’s national security policies in the context of its larger civil rights record.
Surveillance, Secrecy and the Search for Meaningful Accountability, 51 Stanford J. Int’l L. 69 (2015) (selected from a call for papers). This paper considers national security-related surveillance laws in the United States, the United Kingdom and India, questioning ersatz accountability mechanisms.
Preferential Judicial Activism, 17 Berkeley J. Afr.-Am. L. & Pol’y 151 (2015) and 7 J. Race, Gender & Ethnicity 151 (2015) (invited symposium essay). This short Essay assesses how formalistic and rigid reasoning led to dismissals of national-security related cases that allege unconstitutional governmental abuses.
Country Report on Counterterrorism: United States of America, 62 Am. J. Comparative L. 643 (2014). This report was written for the quadrennial International Congress of Comparative Law in 2014, including a summary and critique of U.S. counterterrorism law.
Targeted Killings and the Interest Convergence Dilemma, 36 W. New Eng. L. Rev. 166 (2014) (invited symposium essay). This essay uses Derrick Bell’s interest convergence theory to assess critiques against the Obama administration’s targeted killings policy.
National Security Interest Convergence, 4 Harv. Nat’l Security J. 185 (2012). This article considers political theory, critical race theory and national security law-making to create a framework to identify areas of national security interest convergence.
The Rise of National Security Secrets, 44 Conn. L. Rev. 1563 (2012). This symposium contribution on Professor Aziz Rana’s “Who Decides on Security?” focuses on the Cold War fostering government secrecy around national security, distorting the rule of law.
Judicial Formalism and the State Secrets Privilege, 38 Wm. Mitchell L. Rev. 1629 (2012) (solicited symposium essay). This paper examines the overly formalistic reasoning of courts upholding claims of the state secrets privilege.
What’s in a Name? How Nations Define Terrorism Ten Years After 9/11, 33 U. Pa. J. Int’l L. 1 (2011). This article considers definitions of terrorism used by the United States, the United Kingdom and India and how their impact on the rule of law.
No Place for Secrets: Balancing National Security Interests and the Need for Transparency of the Law, 29 L’Observateur des Nations Unies 151 (2010-12) (solicited article for an issue on Le Secret (The Secret)). This paper discusses the pressure toward secrecy in security-related legal policies in various jurisdictions.
Comparative Perspectives on Specialized Trials for Terrorism, 63 Maine L. Rev. 131 (2010). This article analyzes the rule of law implications of the Obama administration’s military commissions to try terrorism suspects.
Litigating Secrets: Comparative Perspectives on the State Secrets Privilege, 75 Brooklyn L. Rev. 201 (2009). This article considers how the U.S. exercise of the state secrets privilege compares with that of India, England, Scotland and Israel.
National Security Without Secret Laws: How Other Nations Balance National Security Interests and Transparency of the Law. Issue Brief, American Constitution Society for Law and Policy, July 22, 2009.
No More Secret Laws: How Transparency of Executive Branch Legal Policy Doesn’t Let the Terrorists Win, 57 U. Kan. L. Rev. 579 (2009). This article uses a historical and comparative analysis to highlight concerns in how the Office of Legal Counsel develops legal policy. This article was cited in litigation seeking press access to Office of Legal Counsel opinions on counterterrorism programs. See Memorandum of Law in Support of New York Times’ Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment, New York Times v. Department of Justice, NO. 11 CIV. 6990 (WHP) (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 26, 2012).
The President’s Question Time: Power, Information and the Executive Credibility Gap, 17 Cornell J.L. & Publ. Pol’y 247 (2008). This article examines comparative law and politics to consider reforms to increase transparency by the President to Congress.
Leveling the Playing Field: Reforming the Office for Civil Rights to Achieve Better Title IX Enforcement, 32 Colum. J.L. & Soc. Probs. 331 (1999). This article argues for reform of the Office for Civil Rights to improve its enforcement of Title IX.
Shorter Pieces, Briefs, Media and Testimony
Amicus Brief, United States v. Jessica Reznicek, No. 21-2548 (8th Cir. 2021). Written at the request of the Center for Constitutional Rights and addressing questions in the labeling of damage to the Dakota Access Pipeline as “terrorist” activity.
The January 6, 2021 Capitol Riots: Resisting Calls for More Terrorism Laws, 11 J. Nat’l Security L. & Pol’y (2021), available at https://jnslp.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Resisting-Calls-for-More-Terrorism-Laws.pdf.
Challenges and Opportunities: Intersectional Leadership in Law Schools, 23 U. Pa. J.L. & Soc. Change 381 (2020).
Foreword: Symposium: On Account of Sex: Women’s Suffrage and the Role of Gender in Politics, 42 W. New England L. Rev. 333 (2020).
Foreword: Volume 41, 41 W. New England L. Rev. 1 (2019).
The Dangers of National Security Secrecy to our Democracy, American Constitution Society, December 4, 2017, available at https://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/the-dangers-of-national-security-secrecy-to-our-democracy/.
The Plenary Powers Doctrine is Not a Blank Check, American Constitution Society, Sept. 28, 2017, available at https://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/the-plenary-powers-doctrine-is-not-a-blank-check.
Islam on Trial, A Forum Response, Boston Review, Feb. 28, 2017, available at https://bostonreview.net/forum/islam-trial/sudha-setty-sudha-setty-responds-amna-akbar-and-jeanne-theoharis.
Student-Edited Law Reviews Should Continue to Flourish, 32 Touro L. Rev. 235 (2016).
Introduction: Constitutional Conflict and Development: Perspectives from South Asia and Africa, 28 Temple Int’l and Comparative L.J. 179 (2014) (co-authored with Matthew Charity).
Amicus Brief, United States v. Johnson, No. 14-CR-390-1 (N.D. Ill. 2014). Written at the request of the Center for Constitutional Rights and addressing questions of substantive due process in the labeling of “terrorist” activity under the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act of 2006.
State Secrets Might Get a Little More Secret, Just Security, October 17, 2014, available at http://justsecurity.org/16418/state-secrets-secret/
The Rule of the Clan: National Security, “Us” and “Them,” Symposium on Mark S. Weiner’s The Rule of the Clan, Concurring Opinions, July 26, 2013, available at http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2013/07/the-rule-of-the-clan-national-security-us-and-them.html.
Clapper v. Amnesty International: Still Trying for a Day in Court, I-CONnect, Blog of the International Journal of Constitutional Law and Constitutionmaking.org, January 31, 2013, available at http://www.iconnectblog.com/2013/01/clapper-v-amnesty-international-still-trying-for-a-day-in-court/.
A Day in Court? Maybe Not in America, The Herald News, October 27, 2012, available at http://www.heraldnews.com/newsnow/x1292883084/GUEST-OPINION-A-day-in-court-Maybe-not-in-America.
Quoted on national security matters on National Public Radio and in the Los Angeles Times, Associated Press, the Atlantic, Christian Science Monitor, Connecticut Law Tribune and The International.
Testimony before the Appropriations Committee of the Connecticut General Assembly in support of a bill to establish an Asian Pacific American Affairs Commission in Connecticut, February 14, 2008.
Testimony before the Government Administration and Elections Committee of the Connecticut General Assembly, in support of House Bill 6002, a bill to establish an Asian Pacific American Affairs Commission in Connecticut, March 16, 2007.
