Nine years after the unprecedented terrorist attacks on September 11, judicial response to various governmental and individual methods of combating terrorism remains deferential and restrained. The courts have heard at least three types of cases brought by advocates for three distinct groups: the alleged perpetrators of terrorism; the victims of terrorist attacks; and third party humanitarian groups. Implicit in the practical question of how to deal effectively with terrorism is the broader consideration which Congress, the President and others must also address: how to respond to the terrorists' extreme human rights violations without violating international humanitarian law.
Frances Howell Rudko, Searching for Remedial Paradigms: Human Rights in the Age of Terrorism, 5 U. Mass. Roundtable Symp. L. J. 116 (2010).