Date of Award
2016
Document Type
Thesis
Degree Name
Master of Judicial Studies (LL.M.)
Institution
Duke University School of Law
Abstract
From the criminal trial of Aaron Burr on charges of treason to modern-day litigation involving the CIA, the state secrets privilege presents a thorny issue for federal judges. Judge Trenga examines the legal issues at the heart of this privilege—separation of powers, non-justiciability, evidentiary privilege, national security interests, and military secrets—and the two primary doctrinal tracks judges invoke. Then, based on interviews with thirty-one federal judges, Judge Trenga offers insights into how judges think about applying the state secrets privilege to sensitive material.
Citation
Trenga, Anthony John, What Judges Say and Do in Deciding National Security Cases: The Example of the State Secrets Privilege (2016) (unpublished LL.M. thesis, Duke University School of Law)
Available at: https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/mjs/19
Library of Congress Subject Headings
Political questions and judicial power, Judicial review, National security, Judicial process, Executive privilege (Government information), Security classification (Government documents)
Included in
Constitutional Law Commons, Courts Commons, Evidence Commons, Judges Commons, National Security Law Commons, President/Executive Department Commons
Comments
Originally submitted as a theses in fulfillment of the requirements of the Master of Judicial Studies (LL.M.) degree. Then subsequently revised as a law review article in the Harvard National Security Journal..