Sovereignty and its Presuppositions: Before 9/11 and After

Is the modern states system in terminal decline? Are we witnessing a great transformation in that regard? Are the events of 9/11 indicative of that? Or is state sovereignty evolving, yet again, in response to scientific, technological, economic and social changes – as it has done throughout the post-medieval era of its existence? That latter line of argument is put forward in this essay.     

Justice George Sutherland and Commerce-Clause Federalism Before the New Deal

The jurisprudence of Justice George Sutherland illustrates howthe U.S. Supreme Court justified commerce-clause federalismbetween the end of the Civil War and the ascendancy of the NewDeal. Sutherland presented a constitutional and political defenseof federalism grounded in American natural-rights theory. Thisdefense presents arguments that federalism's skeptics and defendershave not considered sufficiently. Skeptics tend to argue thatis impossible to maintain a federalist constitutional arrangement;Sutherland's defense shows how to do so. Federalism's supporterstend to defend the commerce clause on negative grounds, thatit limits government power by forcing the states to competewith each other and Congress to compete with them all. Sutherland,however, drew on a tradition of political theory which stressedthat commerce-clause federalism offered positive benefits bykeeping the federal government lean and mean. It barred Congressfrom regulating on subjects about which it was less informedand competent than state legislators and regulators. By focusingthe federal government on truly national objects like interstatetrade, it left most regulation where citizens could see it-locally.According to this tradition, the commerce clause played a criticalrole in making the national government energetic and effective,and it also ordered local political processes so as to makecitizens self-reliant and fit for republican self-government.     

Judicial Responses to Counter-Terrorism Law after September 11

The role of the courts is quite important, especially in the protection of individual rights and liberties. Many counter-terrorism policies implemented at the national level often infringe on these rights, and courts are the best line of defense against these violations of liberty. However, courts do not always rule in favor of liberty, sometimes ruling in favor of a strict government policy. This analysis seeks to explain the conditions that may lead courts to rule in favor of, or against, the government, arguing that political fragmentation is a potentially key factor in determining when particular case outcomes occur.     

The state of public affairs after 11 September

There is a curiously subtle relationship between the public affairs function and the political world which it seeks to influence. A shock to the political system of the magnitude of the attack on the World Trade Center has effects on the practice of public affairs. Some of these impacts are obvious. Others will only become apparent with the passage of time. In its 15 years of existence the European Centre for Public Affairs has sought to be a ‘safe space’ in which the elements of the political world could meet and discuss in an independent manner and with a degree of academic rigour. From the moment of our founding, we rejected the idea of a world divided between government and lobbyists. It has always been our view that journalists and the media, lobbyists, both from civil society and from the corporate sector, and ministers, members of parliament and civil servants all form part of one seamless political world. They have the same fascination with power and with process. They are intimately and umbilically linked. With this holistic view of the political world, it is natural for the ECPA to be interested in assessing the impact of the events of 11 September on the practice of public affairs. Jointly with The Journal of Public Affairs and The Public Affairs Newsletter, we created a seminar at Chatham House on 9th January, 2002 entitled ‘Public Affairs and the World Crisis: What has changed since September 11th?’ Copyright © 2001 Henry Stewart Publications