Analyzing the Classified Information Procedures Act and its impact on Federal Terrorism Cases (1980 - 2012)

• In Event: Controversial Legislation and the Courts

Abstract

Advocates of military tribunals advance the treat of “graymail” (classified information contained in evidence being made public during Federal Terrorism trials) as one justification for the use of military tribunals, suggesting Federal Courts are ineffective venues for cases involving sensitive evidentiary material. While there is considerable literature on the utility of the Classified Information Protection Act (CIPA), and no shortage of articles attacking CIPA as abrogation of defendant rights, little attention has been paid to an empirical analysis of CIPA effectiveness. This research focuses on whether CIPA has been able to bridge the gap between protecting classified information while allowing United States prosecutors to effectively pursue cases involving terrorism defendants, and whether CIPA cases were substantially different in length, strategy, or outcome than non-CIPA cases. Using legal data from the American Terrorism Study Database, the researchers performed analyses on every federal terrorism case from 1980 to 2012 in which CIPA was invoked.

Author

• Christopher Shields, University of Arkansas