100,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
- Kategorie: Fachliteratur
- Serie: Wiley Series on Homeland Defense and Security)
- Sprache: Englisch
The Complete Guide to Understanding the Structure of Homeland Security Law * New topics featuring leading authors cover topics on Security Threats of Separatism, Secession and Rightwing Extremism; Aviation Industry's 'Crew Resource Management' Principles'; and Ethics, Legal, and Social Issues in Homeland Security * Legal, and Social Issues in Homeland Security. In addition, the chapter devoted to the Trans-Pacific Partnership is a description of economic statecraft, what we really gain from the TPP, and what we stand to lose. The Power of Pop Culture in the Hands of ISIS describes how ISIS communicates and how pop culture is used expertly as a recruiting tool * Text organized by subject with the portions of all the laws related to that particular subject in one chapter, making it easier to reference a specific statute by topic * Allows the reader to recognize that homeland security involves many specialties and to view homeland security expansively and in the long-term * Includes many references as a resource for professionals in various fields including: military, government, first responders, lawyers, and students * Includes an Instructor Manual providing teaching suggestions, discussion questions, true/false questions, and essay questions along with the answers to all of these
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 1700
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2017
Ähnliche
Table of Contents
COVER
TITLE PAGE
LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
ABOUT THE COMPANION WEBSITE
1 INTRODUCTION – OVERVIEW – BACKGROUND
9/11
WHAT IS HOMELAND SECURITY?
INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY AND FAITH‐BASED ASSISTANCE
WHAT DOES HOMELAND SECURITY LOOK LIKE FROM THE OUTSIDE?
WHAT DOES HOMELAND SECURITY LOOK LIKE FROM THE INSIDE?
EVERYONE IS A COMPONENT. EVERYTHING IS IMPORTANT
WHAT IS HOMELAND SECURITY LAW?
THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY LAW
A FEW DEFINITIONS OF TERRORISM
DHS
USA Patriot Act
International Terrorism, 18 USC 2332b
CIA, State Department, 22 USC Sec. 2656f
United Nations
Federal Hate Crime Law, 18 USC 249
PURPOSE OF THIS TEXT
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
ABOUT THIS TEXT
CONTRIBUTING AUTHORS
DISCLAIMER
2 METACOGNITION AND ERRORS IN JUDGMENT RELATED TO DECISION‐MAKING IN HOMELAND SECURITY
THE TRIUNE BRAIN
THE PATTERN‐SEEKING BRAIN
NEGATIVITY BRAIN BIAS
UNDERSTANDING PERCEPTION AND COGNITION
JUDGMENT, HEURISTICS AND BIASES
THINKING ABOUT THINKING TO SOLVE PROBLEMS
CONCLUSION
3 ETHICAL, LEGAL, AND SOCIAL ISSUES IN HOMELAND SECURITY – WHAT THEY ARE AND HOW TO ADDRESS THEM
THE ORIGINS AND ESSENCE OF ELSI
ELSI COMPONENTS DEFINED
SECURITY CULTURE AS A FRAMEWORK FOR ASSESSING AND ADDRESSING ELSI
MAIN ELSI DOMAINS
THE RELEVANCE OF ELSI
HOMELAND SECURITY LEGISLATION AND THE INTENT OF THE CONSTITUTION
DOMESTIC SURVEILLANCE AND HOMELAND SECURITY TECHNOLOGY SUCH AS UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS
ELSI ACROSS THE HOMELAND SECURITY CYCLE
INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES
HOW TO ADDRESS ELSI IN EVERYDAY HOMELAND SECURITY
4 STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENT
DEFINITION: WHAT IS STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENT?
SOURCES
Road Map For National Security: Imperative For Change, February 15, 2001
Quadrennial Defense Review Report, February, 2010
2012–2017 Defense Intelligence Agency Strategy, 2011
National Security Space Strategy, Unclassified Summary, January, 2011
National Strategy for Counterterrorism, June, 2011
Strategic National Risk Assessment, December, 2011
Department of Homeland Security Strategic Plan: Fiscal Years 2012–2016, February, 2012
Global Trends 2030: Alternative Worlds, December 2012, National Intelligence Council
National Infrastructure Protection Plan (NIPP) 2013: Partnering for Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience
2014 Quadrennial Homeland Security Review, June 18, 2014
National Security Strategy, February, 2015
Worldwide Threat Assessment of the US Intelligence Community, February, 2015
The National Military Strategy of the United States of America, June 2015
Our Changing Planet: The U.S. Global Change Research Program for Fiscal Year 2016
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
5 EXTREME RIGHT‐WING IDEOLOGUES, CONSERVATIVE SECESSION, AND TERRORISM
SECESSION INTRODUCTION
RIGHTWING DOMESTIC TERRORISM
CONCLUSION
INSERTS
Texas v. White
, 74 U.S. 700, 726 (1868)
Williams v. Bruffy
, 96 U.S. 176, 186 (1877)
Federalist Paper #9, Alexander Hamilton
Executive Order 12977 (E. O. 12977), Interagency Security Committee, October 19, 1995
Executive Order 13133—Working Group on Unlawful Conduct on the Internet August 5, 1999
Court Security Improvement Act of 2007 (key excerpts)
6 INTELLIGENCE GATHERING
DEFINITIONS
SOURCES
Project on National Security Reform “Forging a New Shield,” November 2008
National Security Act of 1947
Executive Order 13228 of October 8, 2001, Establishing The Office of Homeland Security and the Homeland Security Council
Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act, Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance, June 19, 1968
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, October 25, 1978
USA PATRIOT Act, October 26, 2001
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, (IRTPA)
USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005
Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007, August 3, 2007
Protect America Act of 2007, August 5, 2007
Executive Order 13462, February 29, 2008, President’s Intelligence Advisory Board and Intelligence Oversight Board
FISA Amendments Act Of 2008, July 10, 2008
The National Intelligence Strategy, September, 2014
Usa Freedom Act, Public Law 114–23, June 2, 2015
7 THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
SOURCES
Road Map for National Security: Imperative for Change, February 15, 2001
Homeland Security Act of 2002, November 25, 2002
USA Patriot Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005
Executive Order 13397—Responsibilities of the Department of Homeland Security With Respect to Faith‐Based and Community Initiatives, Thursday, March 9, 2006
The Post‐Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006
Bottom‐Up Review Report, July 2010, Annex B
Department of Homeland Security Strategic Plan: Fiscal Years 2012–2016, February 2012
The 2014 Quadrennial Homeland Security Review, June 2014
Department of Homeland Security Strategic Plan: Fiscal Years 2014–2018
8 FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA)
SOURCES
Executive Order 12148—Federal Emergency Management, July 20, 1979
Homeland Security Act of 2002
Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane Katrina
Summary of PKEMRA
The Post‐Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006
Pets Evacuation and Transportation Standards Act of 2006
FEMA Office of Disability Integration and Coordination
9 NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2006, 2015
SOURCES
National Security Strategy, 2006
National Security Strategy, 2015
10 NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR HOMELAND SECURITY, OCTOBER 2007
SOURCES
“Seeking A National Strategy: A Concert For Preserving Security And Promoting Freedom,” The Phase Ii Report On A U.s. National Security Strategy For The 21St Century, The United States Commission On National Security/21St Century, April 15, 2000
National Strategy for Homeland Security, October 2007
11 NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR COMBATING TERRORISM, 2006; NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR COUNTERTERRORISM, 2011
SOURCES
National Strategy for Combating Terrorism, September 2006
National Strategy for Counterterrorism, June 2011
12 BORDER SECURITY
USA PATRIOT Act, 2001
Homeland Security Act of 2002
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, Advanced Technology Northern Border Security Pilot Program, December 17, 2004
Appropriations, Public Law 109–295, Title V, October 4, 2006
Arctic Region Policy, NSPD‐66/HSPD‐25, January 9, 2009
National Southwest Border Counternarcotics Strategy, June 2009
National Southwest Border Counternarcotics Strategy, 2011
Border Tunnel Prevention Act of 2012
Ultralight Aircraft Smuggling Prevention Act of 2012
The 2012–2016 Border Patrol Strategic Plan
National Southwest Border Counternarcotics Strategy, 2013
13 CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION
SOURCES
Executive Order 13231—Critical Infrastructure Protection in the Information Age, October 18, 2001
USA PATRIOT Act, October 26, 2001
National Strategy for the Physical Protection of Critical Infrastructures and Key Assets, February 2002
Homeland Security Act, November 25, 2002
HSPD 7, Critical Infrastructure, December 17, 2003
9/11 Commission Implementation Act of 2004
Post‐Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006
HSPD 19, Combating Terrorist Use of Explosives in The United States, February, 2007
Improving Critical Infrastructure Security, Title X, Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act, August 3, 2007
National Strategy for Homeland Security, October 2007
National Infrastructure Protection Plan (NIPP), 2009
Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience Training Program (CISRTP)
National Strategy for Information Sharing and Safeguarding (NSISS), December 2012
Ppd‐21, Critical Infrastructure Security And Resilience, February 12, 2013
The President’s Climate Action Plan, June 2013
National Infrastructure Protection Plan (NIPP) 2013: Partnering for Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience
Joint National Priorities for Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience, October 2014
14 CYBERSECURITY LEGISLATION AND CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE VULNERABILITIES
INTRODUCTION
CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE INCIDENTS
LEGISLATION AND EXECUTIVE ACTIONS
SOURCES
Secretary of Defense [Robert Gates] Memorandum: Establishment of a Subordinate Unified U.S. Cyber Command Under U.S. Strategic Command for Military Cyberspace Operation, June 23, 2009
Executive Order 13636—Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity, February 12, 2013 [Barack Obama]
Presidential Policy Directive 21—Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience, February 12, 2013
Executive Order 13691: Promoting Private Sector Cybersecurity Information Sharing, February 13, 2015 [Barack Obama]
Excerpts from S.2012—North American Energy Security and Infrastructure Act of 2016, May 25, 2016
Excerpts from S.754 (in H.R.2029 as Division N—Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2015, December 18, 2015
15 AGRICULTURE AND FOOD
SOURCES
Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of [June 12] 2002
Homeland Security Act, November 25, 2002
National Strategy for the Physical Protection of Critical Infrastructures and Key Assets, February 2003
HSPD 9, Defense of United States Agriculture and Food, January 30, 2004
National Agriculture and Food Defense Act of 2007
FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, January 2011
2014 Quadrennial Homeland Security Review, June 18, 2014
Response Federal Interagency Operational Plan, July 2014
Report to Congress on the National Agriculture and Food Defense Strategy (NAFDS); Submitted pursuant to Section 108 of the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA), April 2015
Food and Agriculture Sector‐Specific Plan, 2015
Customs and Border Protection: Protecting Agriculture
16 TRANSPORTATION SECURITY
A. OVERVIEW
SOURCES
National Strategy For The Physical Protection Of Critical Infrastructures And Key Assets, February 2003
National Strategy For Transportation Security, Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, Title IV—Transportation Security, December 17, 2004
Executive Order 13416—Strengthening Surface Transportation Security, December, 2006
Transportation Security Planning and Information Sharing, Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007, Title XII, August 3, 2007
National Transit Systems Security Act of 2007
Surface Transportation Security, Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007, Title XV
Transportation Systems Sector‐Specific Plan, (An Annex to NIPP) 2010
B. AVIATION SECURITY
SOURCES
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act, Title IV, Aviation Security, December 17, 2004
NSPD 47/HSPD 16, Aviation Security Policy, June 22, 2006
Security and Accountability for Every Port Act of 2006
National Strategy For Aviation Security, March 26, 2007
Aviation Transportation System Security Plan, Supporting Plan to the National Strategy for Aviation Security, March 26, 2007
Air Domain Surveillance and Intelligence Integration Plan, Supporting Plan to the National Strategy for Aviation Security, March 26, 2007
Aviation Operational Threat Response Plan, Supporting Plan To The National Strategy For Aviation Security, March 26, 2007
Domestic Outreach Plan, Supporting Plan To The National Strategy For Aviation Security, March 26, 2007
International Outreach Plan, Supporting Plan To The National Strategy For Aviation Security, March 26, 2007
Transportation Systems Sector‐Specific Plan, Annex A: Aviation, 2010
C. MARITIME TRANSPORTATION SECURITY
SOURCES
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Part VII, High Seas, Article 105, 1982
Maritime Transportation Security Act Of 2002, November 25, 2002
TITLE I—MARITIME TRANSPORTATION SECURITY
Intelligence Reform And Terrorism Prevention Act, Title IV—Subtitle D, December 17, 2004
HSPD 13. Maritime Security Policy, December 21, 2004
Reducing Crime and Terrorism at America’s Seaports Act of 2005
The National Strategy For Maritime Security, September 2005
National Plan To Achieve Maritime Domain Awareness, Of The National Strategy For Maritime Security, October 2005
Maritime Transportation System Security Recommendations, October 2005
Maritime Commerce Security Plan of the National Strategy for Maritime Security, October 2005
International Outreach And Coordination Strategy Of The National Strategy For Maritime Security, November 2005
Maritime Infrastructure Recovery Plan of the National Strategy For Maritime Security, April 2006
Security and Accountability for Every Port Act of 2006, or Safe Port Act
Small Vessel Security Strategy, April 2008
Transportation Systems Sector‐Specific Plan, Annex B: Maritime, 2010
Testimony Of Admiral Robert J. Papp, Commandant “Safe Port Act Reauthorization: Securing Our Nation’s Critical Infrastructure” Before The Senate Committee On Commerce, Science, & Transportation, July 21, 2010
D. RAIL TRANSPORTATION
SOURCES
Title XV, Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act. August 3, 2007
Transportation Security Agency, Final Rule, Rail Transportation Security, November 2008
Partnership Key to Reducing Risk in Rail, DHS Website dated March 4, 2009
E. TRUCKING
SOURCES
USA PATRIOT Act, 2001
Security and Accountability for Every Port Act, October 13, 2006
TSA Website, Surface Transportation
F. BUS
SOURCES
Title XV, Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007
Fiscal Year 2016 Intercity Bus Security Grant Program
17 WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION
SOURCES
HSPD 4 National Strategy to Combat Weapons Of Mass Destruction, December 2002
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004
HSPD 14/NSPD 43, Domestic Nuclear Detection, April 15, 2005
Executive Order 13382—Blocking Property of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferators and Their Supporters, July 1, 2005
Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, 2006
Robert G. Joseph, Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security, Written Statement to the Senate Armed Services Committee Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities, Washington, DC, March 29, 2006
Improving Critical Infrastructure Security, Title XI, Enhanced Defenses Against Weapons Of Mass Destruction, Implementing Recommendations of The 9/11 Commission Act, August. 3, 2007
National Strategy for Homeland Security, October 2007
HSPD 17/NSPD 48, Nuclear Materials Information Center
A National Strategy for CBRNE Standards, May 2011
18 BIODEFENSE AND WMD MEDICAL COUNTERMEASURES
SOURCES
USA PATRIOT Act
Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002
Homeland Security Act, November 25, 2002
National Strategy for the Physical Protection of Critical Infrastructures and Key Assets, February, 2003
Executive Order 13295 Of April 4, 2003, Revised List Of Quarantinable Communicable Diseases
HSPD 10, Biodefense for the 21st Century, April 28, 2004
Project Bioshield Act of 2004, P.L. 108–276, July 21, 2004
Post‐Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act, October 4, 2006
Pandemic and All‐Hazards Preparedness Act, December 19, 2006
HSPD 18, Medical Countermeasures Against Weapons Of Mass Destruction, January 2007
Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of August 2007
HSPD 21, Public Health and Medical Preparedness, October 18, 2007
DOD National Center for Medical Intelligence, March 2009
National Strategy for Countering Biological Threats, November 2009
Pandemic and All‐Hazards Preparedness Reauthorization Act of 2013
National Health Security Strategy and Implementation Plan 2015–2018
The 2015 Public Health Emergency Medical Countermeasures Enterprise Strategy and Implementation Plan
19 NATIONAL CONTINUITY POLICY
SOURCES
HSPD 20/NSPD 51, Annex A
National Continuity Policy Implementation Plan, August 2007
20 IDENTIFICATION ISSUES
SOURCES
I. TERRORIST SCREENING AND AIRPORT PASSENGER SCREENING
HSPD 2. Combating Terrorism Through Immigration Policies, October 29, 2001
HSPD 6, Screening Information to Protect Against Terrorism, 2003
HSPD 11, Comprehensive Terrorist‐Related Screening, 2004
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004
HSPD 24, Biometrics for Identification, June 5, 2008
The Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative
TSA Pre✓
II. REAL ID ACT
Homeland Security Act of 2002
9/11 Commission Report Recommendations, July 2004
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004
REAL ID Act, 2005
III. COMMON IDENTIFICATION FOR FEDERAL EMPLOYEES
HSPD 12, Common Identification for Federal Employees, August 27, 2004
Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007
21 NATIONAL INCIDENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (NIMS) AND NATIONAL RESPONSE FRAMEWORK (NRF)
SOURCES
HSPD 5, February 28, 2003
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004
National Response Framework, Second Edition, May 2013
National Incident Management System, Draft of 2016 Version
22 PREPAREDNESS
SOURCES
Executive Order 13234 of November 9, 2001, Presidential Task Force on Citizen Preparedness in the War on Terrorism
HSPD 3, Homeland Security Advisory System, March 11, 2002
Homeland Security Act of 2002, November 25, 2002
Executive Order 13347 of July 22, 2004, Individuals With Disabilities in Emergency Preparedness
9/11 Commission Implementation Act of 2004
Post‐Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act, October 4, 2006
Public Alert and Warning System, Executive Order 13407 of June 26, 2006
Warning, Alert, and Response Network Act of[October 13,] 2006
Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act, August 3, 2007
National Strategy for Homeland Security, October 2007
National Terrorism Advisory System (NTAS) 2011
National Response Framework, Second Edition, May 2013
Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment Guide – Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 201, Second Edition, DHS, August 29, 2013
2014 Quadrennial Homeland Security Review, June 18, 2014
Response Federal Interagency Operational Plan, July 2014
The National Preparedness Goal, Second Edition, September 2015
23 RESILIENCY AND A CULTURE OF PREPAREDNESS
SOURCES
HSPD 21, Public Health and Medical Preparedness, October 18, 2007
2008 National Defense Strategy
Top Ten Challenges Facing the Next Secretary of Homeland Security, Homeland Security Advisory Council, September 11, 2008
PPD‐8, National Preparedness, March 30, 2011
National Preparedness Guidelines
The National Preparedness Goal, September 2011
National Preparedness Goal, First Edition, September 2011
Response Federal Interagency Operational Plan, July 2014
2014 Quadrennial Homeland Security Review
The National Preparedness Goal, Second Edition, September 2015
The 2016 National Preparedness Report, March 30, 2016
24 AUTHORITY TO USE MILITARY FORCE
SOURCES
U.S. Constitution, Article I Section 8, Congressional Power, 1787
U.S. Constitution, Article II Section 2, Presidential Power 1787
Insurrection Act 1807
U.S. Constitution, Amendment XIV, 1868
Posse Comitatus Act 1878, 18 USC 1385
War Powers Resolution of 1973, 50 USC 1541 et. seq.
Military Support For Civilian Law Enforcement, 10 USC 371 et. seq.
Authorization For Military Action Against Iraq Resolution, January 14, 1991
PDD‐39, U.S. Policy on Counterterrorism, June 21, 1995
Department Of Defense Directive Number 5107.1, January 5, 2001
U.S. Government Interagency Domestic Terrorism Concept Of Operations Plan, January 2001
Authorization For Use Of Military Force, September 18, 2001
U.S. Northern Command, October 1, 2002
Strategy For Homeland Defense And Civil Support, Department Of Defense, June 2005
Executive Summary
USNORTHCOM’s CBRNE Consequence Management Response Force, September 30, 2008
Department Of Defense Directive Number 3025.18, December 29, 2010
Executive Order—Federal Support For Local Law Enforcement Equipment Acquisition, January 16, 2015
Recommendations Pursuant To Executive Order 13688 Federal Support For Local Law Enforcement Equipment Acquisition, May 2015
25 CREATING THE GUARDIANS: THE STATUS OF HOMELAND SECURITY EDUCATION
MANY PROGRAMS NATIONWIDE
GROWING WITHIN MANY PREEXISTING DISCIPLINES
STRIVING TO BECOME ITS OWN DISCIPLINE
WHAT SHOULD A HOMELAND SECURITY CURRICULUM INCLUDE?
CONCLUSION
26 APPLYING MANAGEMENT AND ORGANIZATIONAL THEORY EDUCATION TO CREATE EFFECTIVE AGENCIES
HOMELAND SECURITY AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT (HSEM)
STRUCTURAL TRAITS OF SUCCESSFUL AGENCIES
APPLYING MANAGEMENT AND ORGANIZATIONAL THEORY TO ACHIEVE EFFECTIVE AGENCIES
MANAGERS AND LEADERS
BASIC ORGANIZATIONAL THEORY
BASIC MANAGEMENT THEORY
STRATEGIC PLANNING
TRAINING AND EDUCATION
27 U.S. ECONOMIC STATECRAFT, HOMELAND SECURITY, AND THE TRANS‐PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP
INTRODUCTION
DEFINING ECONOMIC STATECRAFT
ECONOMIC STATECRAFT AND SECURITY
THE TRANS‐PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP
ECONOMIC STATECRAFT IS COMPLICATED
EFFECTIVE ECONOMIC STATECRAFT
28 DECONSTRUCTING LATIN AMERICAN SECURITY
INTRODUCTION
WHAT WE TALK ABOUT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT LATIN AMERICA
THE CURRENT SECURITY PICTURE
DECONSTRUCTION AND REFRAMING THE ISSUE
CONCLUSION
29 THE POWER OF POP CULTURE IN THE HANDS OF ISIS
INTRODUCTION
DEFINITIONS
TRENDS IN RADICALIZATION
RADICALIZATION THEORY
APPLYING THE RADICALIZATION PUZZLE
JIHADI COOL RECRUITMENT TACTICS
CONCLUSION
INDEX
END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT
List of Tables
Chapter 26
Table 26.1 Summary of Lunenburg's leadership–management continuum
Guide
Cover
Table of Contents
Begin Reading
Pages
ii
iii
iv
v
vi
ix
xi
xiii
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
WILEY SERIES IN HOMELAND AND DEFENSE SECURITY
Series Editor
TED G. LEWIS Professor, Naval Postgraduate School
Foundations of Homeland Security: Law and Policy/Martin J. Alperen, Esq.Comparative Homeland Security: Global Lessons/Nadav MoragFoundations of Homeland Security: Law and Policy, Second Edition/Martin J. Alperen, Esq.
FOUNDATIONS OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Law and Policy
2nd Edition
MARTIN J. ALPEREN, Esq.
The second edition first published 2017© 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Inc
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by law. Advice on how to obtain permission to reuse material from this title is available at http://www.wiley.com/go/permissions.
The right of Martin J. Alperen to be identified as the author of this work and has been asserted in accordance with law.
Registered OfficesJohn Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USA
Editorial Office111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USA
For details of our global editorial offices, customer services, and more information about Wiley products visit us at www.wiley.com.
Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats and by print‐on‐demand. Some content that appears in standard print versions of this book may not be available in other formats.
Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty
The publisher and the authors make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this work and specifically disclaim all warranties, including without limitation any implied warranties of fitness for a particular purpose. This work is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for every situation. In view of ongoing research, equipment modifications, changes in governmental regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to the use of experimental reagents, equipment, and devices, the reader is urged to review and evaluate the information provided in the package insert or instructions for each chemical, piece of equipment, reagent, or device for, among other things, any changes in the instructions or indication of usage and for added warnings and precautions. The fact that an organization or website is referred to in this work as a citation and/or potential source of further information does not mean that the author or the publisher endorses the information the organization or website may provide or recommendations it may make. Further, readers should be aware that websites listed in this work may have changed or disappeared between when this works was written and when it is read. No warranty may be created or extended by any promotional statements for this work. Neither the publisher nor the author shall be liable for any damages arising herefrom.
Library of Congress Cataloging‐in‐Publication Data
Names: Alperen, Martin J., author.Title: Foundations of homeland security : law and policy / Martin J. Alperen, Esq.Description: 2nd Edition | Hoboken, NJ : John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2017. | Series: Wiley series in homeland and defense security | Includes bibliographical references and index.Identifiers: LCCN 2016043331 (print) | LCCN 2016044227 (ebook) | ISBN 9781119289111 (cloth) | ISBN 9781119289128 (pdf) | ISBN 9781119289135 (epub)Subjects: LCSH: National security–Law and legislation–United States. | Emergency management–Law and legislation–United States. | Terrorism–Prevention–Law and legislation–United States.Classification: LCC KF4850 .A947 2017 (print) | LCC KF4850 (ebook) | DDC 344.7305/32–dc23LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2016043331
Cover design by DJ Watts
EPIGRAPH
The United States has long championed freedom because doing so reflects our values and advances our interests. It reflects our values because we believe the desire for freedom lives in every human heart and the imperative of human dignity transcends all nations and cultures.
Championing freedom advances our interests because the survival of liberty at home increasingly depends on the success of liberty abroad. Governments that honor their citizens’ dignity and desire for freedom tend to uphold responsible conduct toward other nations, while governments that brutalize their people also threaten the peace and stability of other nations. Because democracies are the most responsible members of the international system, promoting democracy is the most effective long‐term measure for strengthening international stability; reducing regional conflicts; countering terrorism and terror‐supporting extremism; and extending peace and prosperity.
To protect our Nation and honor our values, the United States seeks to extend freedom across the globe by leading an international effort to end tyranny and to promote effective democracy.
– National Security Strategy of the United States of America, March 2006, § II(C)
The only thing necessary for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing.
– Edmund Burke
Those who have the privilege to know have the duty to act.
– Albert Einstein
I try to make my sojourn here a useful interlude.
– J. Antonio Jarvis
This book is dedicated to the memory of Alva A. Swan, Attorney General of the United States Virgin Islands (VI).Attorney Swan cared deeply about the People and Territory of the VI.He supported the development of the VI’s preparedness as well as homeland security education.He was liked and respected by all who had the privilege to have worked with him.
LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS
Pablo Brum, MA, Private Sector Intelligence Analyst with focus on cybersecurity, Latin America, and terrorism.
William A. Carter, Associate Fellow, Strategic Technologies Program, Center for Strategic and International Studies.
Angi English, MS, MA, LPC, LMFT, Division Chief of Strategic Programs and Senior Advisor for the Texas State Office of Risk Management.
Judson M. Freed, MA, CEM, Director Ramsey (MN) County Emergency Management and Homeland Security.
Tobias T. Gibson, PhD, Tenured Associate Professor of Political Science, Security Studies Program Director, Westminster College (MO).
Robert Hayhurst, EdD, Section Chief, Planner Development for the Department of Homeland Security, Office of Policy (Strategy, Plans, Analysis and Risk).
Laura Manning Johnson, PhD, Chair of the Strategic Studies Department and the Homeland Security Chair at the National War College.
David A. Parker, Associate Fellow, Simon Chair in Political Economy and Brzezinski Institute on Geostrategy, Center for Strategic and International Studies.
Joseph Russo, Lieutenant, Fire Department of the City of New York, Master’s in Homeland Security from the Naval Postgraduate School’s Center for Homeland Defense and Security expected March 2017.
Alexander Siedschlag, PhD, MA, Professor of Homeland Security and Public Health Sciences, Chair of Homeland Security Programs, The Pennsylvania State University – Penn State Harrisburg, School of Public Affairs.
Daniel G. Sofio, Research Associate, Scholl Chair in International Business and Brzezinski Institute on Geostrategy, Center for Strategic and International Studies.
Richard Q. Sterns, George Mason University Law School, Managing Editor of the National Security Law Journal at George Mason University Law School, JD expected 2018, Business & Marketing Coordinator at the law firm of Reno & Cavanaugh, PLLC in Washington, DC.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Many thanks to my editor, Morgan Eser, for his thorough reviews and careful editing.
Also deserving of thanks are the countless unknown men and women who comprise the homeland security enterprise. Some of them work for intelligence agencies. Some work for the military. Some work for the FBI, or DHS, or law enforcement. Included here are fire and EMS who are ready to risk their lives for you. Some are civilians who saw something and said something. Hospitals and their staffs are part of the enterprise. It includes interpreters, transcriptionists, IT and cyber professionals. Even ham radio (amateur radio) operators, who practice relaying information in case the main communications systems fail. It includes the folks who drafted the statutes and policy documents you will see in this book. It also includes you, because you chose to learn about the subject. This brings us to your teachers, who had to learn new material; to the school administrators who approved the course; and to those who authored books that are used in the courses. The homeland security enterprise is truly vast and I thank all of you.
ABOUT THE COMPANION WEBSITE
This book is accompanied by a companion website:
www.wiley.com/go/alperen/homeland_security_law
The website includes:
Instructor’s Manual
1INTRODUCTION – OVERVIEW – BACKGROUND
“We Have Some Planes”1
No book about homeland security is complete without mention of 9/11 and reference to The 9/11 Commission Report2 and other factual reporting about the attack. There is then a discussion of what homeland security is. There are sections on what homeland security looks like from the outside and from the inside, and a discussion about the development ofhomeland security law since 9/11. Next are definitions of terrorism, a list of goals or learning objectives for the reader, and then a little about this text.
9/11
Understanding what happened and how September 11, 2001, affected America and the world is important for understanding homeland security law and policy, but is beyond the scope of this book. I recommend readers familiarize themselves with the documented history and background. The 9/11 Commission Report, the result of an intensive government‐sponsored investigation, is the official version of the events. Columbia University’s The World Trade Center Attack: The Official Documents,3 and City University of New York/George Mason University’s The September 11th Digital Archives4 both have a wealth of information.
This book and what you are learning about is not just an academic exercise. For a reminder of 9/11, see this poignant video of the burning towers, the people, scene, etc., set to music by Enya.5
Up From Zero, a one‐hour video from the U.S. Department of Labor, is an uplifting profile of the tradespeople who removed what was left of the World Trade Center after 9/11/2001. A remarkable story in itself, made even more so because some of the same workers also helped to build it years earlier.6
The Boston Marathon bombing on April 15, 2013, is the topic of a remarkable 14‐minute video by Chris Bellavita and the CHDS media team. Lilacs out of the Dead Land: 9 Lessons to be Learned from Last Week, introduces many of the issues relevant to understanding homeland security.7
WHAT IS HOMELAND SECURITY?
Vision of Homeland Security
According to the Homeland Security Council in 2007, “the United States, through a concerted national effort that galvanizes the strengths and capabilities of Federal, State, local, and Tribal governments; the private and non‐profit sectors; and regions, communities, and individual citizens – along with our partners in the international community – will work to achieve a secure Homeland that sustains our way of life as a free, prosperous, and welcoming America.”8
More recently, the 2014 Quadrennial Homeland Security Review described the Homeland Security Vision as “A homeland that is safe, secure, and resilient against terrorism and other hazards, where American interests, aspirations, and way of life can thrive.”9
Mission Statement
The Department of Homeland Security lists five missions:
Prevent terrorism and enhancing security;
Secure and manage our borders;
Enforce and administer our immigration laws;
Safeguard and secure cyberspace;
Ensure resilience to disasters.
10
Homeland Security Distinguished from Homeland Defense
Homeland security and homeland defense are complementary components of the National Security Strategy. Homeland defense is the protection of US sovereignty, territory, domestic population, and critical defense infrastructure against external threats and aggression, or other threats… Missions are defined as homeland defense if the nation is under a concerted attack. The Department of Defense (DOD) leads homeland defense and is supported by the other federal agencies. In turn, the DOD supports the nation's homeland security effort, which is led by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).11
Definition of Homeland Security
Homeland Security is defined as “a concerted national effort to prevent terrorist attacks within the United States, reduce America’s vulnerability to terrorism, and minimize the damage and recover from attacks that do occur.”12
No Consensus
Despite the definition, mission statement, and vision, there is no consensus among practitioners and the public as to what the term Homeland Security actually means. Different groups view it differently.13 The extremes of opinion are represented, for the narrow view, by those who feel homeland security is only about terrorism. They believe focusing on anything additional dilutes, distracts, and weakens the homeland security mission.
Others say its focus is terrorism and natural disasters. Still others claim homeland security is about “all hazards” (terrorism, man‐made disasters, and natural disasters). To some, homeland security is focused on “jurisdictional hazards” (i.e. homeland security means different things to different jurisdictions depending upon that jurisdiction’s particular hazards, risks, and level of preparedness). Examples of some of the jurisdictional hazards include hurricanes, tornadoes, flooding, and earthquakes.
At the other extreme, the broad view of homeland security advocates that homeland security is about everything – that it implicates almost every sector of our lives and there is very little which does not relate to it in some way.
Under this view, the arts (painting, poetry, music, dance, theater, food) have homeland security implications. Known to break down barriers and overcome cultural differences, sometimes the arts are the only connection between otherwise hostile/unfriendly countries.14 “We must never forget that art is not a form of propaganda; it is a form of truth.”15 Even food counts. “It's often said that the closest interaction many Americans have with other countries' cultures is through food. That kind of culinary diplomacy is particularly common in Washington, D.C., where immigrants from all over the world have cooked up a diverse food scene….”16
One practitioner uses the term “generational hazards.” These are hazards created by the present generation that “take many decades to metastasize before finally reaching a disastrous end‐state that impacts future generations.”17 Global warming is one example.
For those who think homeland security must also include global and ideological issues such as freedom, self‐determination, democracy, sustainable growth and consumption, overpopulation, environmental degradation, inadequate health care, extreme poverty, intolerance, social injustice, etc., homeland security is synonymous with “One World Security.”18 We can plan to prevent, prepare for, and recover from a terrorist attack. We can also take the broader and longer‐term view and work to make the world a better place where there will be fewer terrorists.
A Different Name – A Different Focus
The titles we used and the focus of what we now call homeland security have changed over the years19. During the Cold War, we called it “Civil Defense,” focused on nuclear war with the Soviets. When the Cold War ended, the focus moved to natural hazards. After 9/11, we called it homeland security, focused on terrorism. Homeland security is now focused on “all hazards” (terrorism + natural disasters + man‐made disasters). Within this list of terms should also be “public safety.”
Views of Emergency Management
Further insight into what is homeland security can be gained by examining different models of emergency management. Michael D. Selves20 describes two philosophically different views of emergency management – the “emergency services” model and the “public administration” model.
The “emergency services [model is] primarily concerned with the coordination of emergency services.” Among other things, Selves points out that under the emergency services model
Organizational interactions tend to be primarily with emergency services agencies. Managers operating under the E‐S model may be reluctant to interact with non‐emergency services agencies and especially with senior, elected officials. Often emergency management functions are embedded within an emergency service agency. This has the effect of isolating them further from the policy making functions of the jurisdiction. Access to local executives and elected officials is often indirect and limited by the organizational structure. Interaction with policy level officials is also often characterized by an attitude that the “politicians” are a nuisance during response operations and should be “kept somewhere so they don’t get in the way”.
The public administration model is much broader.
The P‐A model is based on a philosophy which views emergency management as an element of the overall administration of government.It sees emergency management as that aspect of public administration which deals with the operation of government during crisis. Because of this, there is an interest in the political, social and psychological factors that are involved in crisis management. The concern is focused on not just the emergency services response, but on the impact of the disaster/emergency in terms of larger jurisdictional issues…
Practitioners operating under the P‐A model tend to approach emergency management as a discipline, subject to academic research and debate with the results … being used as tools in implementing a local program…
The “emergency services” model is narrow, restricted, and limited. The “public administration” model is, by comparison, broad, full, and robust. The public administration model must address the full range of issues while the emergency services model just makes sure the fire is out.
Furthering the broad view of homeland security, President Obama stated there is no distinction between homeland security and national security.21 He “described the nation's energy challenges as both a matter of national security and environmental protection.”22 The U.S. Commission on National Security wrote, “We have taken a broad view of national security. In the new era, sharp distinctions between “foreign” and “domestic” no longer apply…”23 The Director of National Intelligence said growing worldwide energy demand, global warming, food and water shortages, and increasing population are national security issues.24 The Department of Defense, National Defense Strategy reflects this same sentiment.25 The 2010 National Security Strategy states that “the danger from climate change is real, urgent, and severe.”
Additional examples of the broad view of homeland security include, “The capacity of America’s educational system to create a 21st century workforce second to none in the world…”26 and “America’s heavy dependence on a global petroleum market that is unpredictable, to say the least.”27 Former president Jimmy Carter said in May 2009, “our inseparable energy and environmental decisions will determine how well we can maintain a vibrant society, protect our strategic interests, regain worldwide political and economic leadership, meet relatively new competitive challenges, and deal with less fortunate nations. Collectively, nothing could be more important.”28
INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY AND FAITH‐BASED ASSISTANCE
Hurricane Katrina will be examined thoroughly in the FEMA chapter of this volume (Ch. 8) and blame for the poor response can be debated and assigned to several management‐level individuals, entities, and levels of government. It does not, however, fall on them alone. There must be some “individual responsibility.” The question, is just how much?
Many of the people who perished and suffered were very poor, ill, frail, and/or disenfranchised. Is it good governance to expect a person who can barely feed themselves to, on their own, relocate to another city, or go to a hotel for a few days? Which level of government and which individuals were in the best position to know the existing infrastructure weaknesses, the severity of the coming storm, and the constituents?
Although taking “individual responsibility” is admired in our society, the term is not a focus in the homeland security literature. That said, America has a long history of religious organizations taking responsibility for those less fortunate. “The White House Office of Faith‐based and Neighborhood Partnerships works to build bridges between the federal government and nonprofit organizations, both secular and faith‐based, to better serve Americans in need.”29 There is the DHS Center for Faith‐based & Neighborhood Partnerships30 and FEMA's Voluntary, Faith‐Based, & Community‐Based Organizations.31
WHAT DOES HOMELAND SECURITY LOOK LIKE FROM THE OUTSIDE?
Using an Office of Homeland Security/Emergency Management (HSEM)32 as an example, homeland security looks like or reflects the breadth‐of‐homeland‐security view of its leaders. For those with an ‘emergency services’ orientation we would expect to see major involvement by emergency services providers only (police, fire, EMS, etc.). This system might have the best equipment and respond with military precision, yet if these are the only participants, then the job is done as soon as the scene is safe.
An HSEM office with a “public administration” focus would have a vastly broader area of responsibility. This HSEM would involve not just a city’s first responders but also all subsequent responders; those represented in part by the city agencies that will have a role in recovery. These include public works, parks and recreation, public health, education, animal control, building inspection, child support, city engineer, information technology, environment, housing, mayor or administrator, medical examiner or coroner, power, planning, port authority, zoo, and the finance and tax people. Every city agency would be involved with the HSEM. After surviving a disaster, when the first responders are done, these subsequent responders will make a city resilient.
At the very least, a broad‐minded HSEM office will have all of its agencies working as soon after a disaster as possible. Ideally, all of the agencies have practiced working together in alternative locations and with limited communications capabilities. All agencies should have ways to obtain essential equipment, supplies, and other vital resources even without a fully functional city government. For example, the public health department procures latex gloves from the local pharmacy when the traditional supplier is unavailable. In addition, all of this should be practiced and coordinated with federal, state, and tribal governments, the private and non‐profit sectors, and regions, communities, and individual citizens. For more on this, see the chapters on preparedness and resilience in this volume (chapters 22 and 23).
WHAT DOES HOMELAND SECURITY LOOK LIKE FROM THE INSIDE?
America faces an “evolving landscape of homeland security threats and hazards. The Deepwater Horizon oil spill in 2010, Hurricane Sandy in 2012, and the Boston Marathon bombing in 2013 illustrate these evolving threats and hazards. We must constantly learn from them and adapt.”33
Homeland security is not static, absolute, or permanent. It is continuous and adaptive. It is dynamic. On every level, homeland security requires cooperation, joint operations, and collaboration. It is integrated, interrelated, and interagency. “The challenges to national security today defy traditional categories. National security now involves a wide array of issues that can be addressed only with a broader set of highly integrated and carefully calibrated capabilities.”34 “The evolution of the terrorist threat demands a well‐informed, highly agile, and well‐networked group of partners and stakeholders…”35
Emergency services agencies (first responders) all over the country have a grand history of cooperating with each other. Thus homeland security has horizontal integration. Almost every statute and policy document related to homeland security requires that a certain plan or action be coordinated with federal, state, county, city, town, tribal, and regional governments, and with the private sector. There is also, at least in theory, vertical integration.
The 9/11 Commission Report called the attacks a failure of imagination.36 How we think about the subject, or don’t think about it, can be as important as any other aspect of homeland security. "We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.”37 “Truly successful decision making… demands more than just a picture of the world as it is. It demands in addition a picture of the world as it will (or at least may) be.”38
Homeland security requires that new ways of thinking about or looking at a problem, and new vision, be nourished and encouraged. There must always be room at the table for them. (See chapter 2, Metacognition and Errors in Judgment Related to Decision Making in Homeland Security.)
EVERYONE IS A COMPONENT. EVERYTHING IS IMPORTANT
Homeland security has many components and they are all critical. For example, no matter what type of incident, whether it is a storm, earthquake, flood, tornado, man‐made disaster such as a train wreck with deadly chemicals aboard, or terrorism, without communications, intelligence cannot reach decision‐makers and direction cannot be conveyed to the people in the position to take action. Without good intelligence, those in charge will not know the best actions to take, regardless of whether they can communicate. Without trained, prepared, and properly equipped responders to take action, communication and intelligence are meaningless.
This is a more important point than it might appear to be at first glance because “everyone” is a lot. It includes not just the decision‐makers, intelligence officials, and first responders mentioned in the preceding paragraph. “Everyone is a component” means the entire community. For example, if there is a major catastrophe and if members of the community know basic first aid, that will free up overwhelmed first responders to deal with major injuries. FEMA’s CERT (Community Emergency Response Team, sometimes it goes by other names) training is an excellent resource that increases the number of people who can contribute. Please see chapters 22 and 23 on preparedness and resilience.
WHAT IS HOMELAND SECURITY LAW?
One definition of homeland security is that it is “a concerted national effort to prevent terrorist attacks within the United States, reduce America’s vulnerability to terrorism, and minimize the damage and recover from attacks that do occur.”39 Adding the Department of Homeland Security’s all hazards approach, it follows logically, then, that Homeland Security Laws are those statutes enacted to prevent, mitigate, respond to, and recover from man‐made or natural disasters, catastrophic accidents, or terrorist attacks.40
Homeland Security Law had its official beginning on September 11, 2001. Prior to then, our nation “lacked a unifying vision, a cohesive strategic approach, and the necessary institutions within government to secure the Homeland against terrorism.…[That day] transformed our thinking.”41 Six weeks later, October 26, 2001, Congress passed the USA Patriot Act.42 On November 25, 2002, it passed the Homeland Security Act43 establishing the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).44
Documents called National Strategies, produced by the Executive Branch of government, enunciate the nation’s overriding homeland security strategies. For example, there is the National Security Strategy, the National Strategy for the Physical Protection of Critical Infrastructures and Key Assets, and the National Strategy for Combatting Terrorism. A complete list of these and other related documents can be found in the Homeland Security Digital Library.45 We will discuss some of these later in the book.
Presidential Directives are much shorter than the strategies. Each one is focused on a specific subject area. Some of them are public, and some classified. The administration of President George W. Bush called them “Homeland Security Presidential Directives” (HSPDs). HSPD 7 relates to critical infrastructure identification, prioritization, and protection. HSPD 8 deals with national preparedness. HSPD 9 is entitled “Defense of United States Agriculture and Food.”
In President Barack Obama’s administration, they are called “Presidential Policy Directives” (PPDs). PPD 2 is about Implementation of the National Strategy for Countering Biological Threats. PPD 20, about U.S. Cyber Operations Policy, is classified and only a fact sheet is available, not the full text. PPD 21 is entitled “Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience.” PPD 28 is about signals intelligence. We will study some of these.
The Disaster Relief Act of 1974 established the procedures for presidential disaster declarations. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), created during the administration of President Jimmy Carter in 1979, consolidated under one agency the disaster management functions that previously were scattered among several independent agencies. The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act46 (1988) amended and incorporated the provisions of the 1974 Disaster Relief Act. “The Stafford Act,” as it is called, sets forth the procedures for declaring a disaster and requesting federal assistance, and then guides the subsequent emergency response through ultimate recovery.
After a clearly inadequate response to hurricane Katrina, the Post‐Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act47 (PKEMRA), made significant changes to FEMA and DHS, and helped to clarify the State and Federal Government’s roles, including FEMA’s and DHS’s roles, for responding to large‐scale events.
The national strategies, HSPDs, PPDs, and statutes such as the Patriot Act, the Homeland Security Act, the Stafford Act, PKEMRA, and others, executive orders, plus portions of related statutes, comprise homeland security law and policy and are the homeland security framework and are what this book is about. The Department of Homeland Security itself and all homeland security actions it takes exist only in compliance with these foundational documents.
THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY LAW
It is impossible to understand the complexity, scope, and depth of the Patriot Act without reading the statute, thus significant portions are reproduced here. The Patriot Act was extremely controversial and invoked public protests claiming it violated rights to privacy. One of its most controversial provisions involved increasing the availability of surveillance without the need for a judicially approved warrant. Supporters of the Patriot Act claim it was sharply focused to achieve its goal and to decisively correct some of the country’s security weaknesses.48
Regardless of whether one approved of the Patriot Act or not, it was an intellectual accomplishment representing a tremendous effort in a very short time period. It involved understanding many complex and interrelated statutes covering many areas of existing law, and it created new law.
Although the Homeland Security Act was not written in the same short time period as the Patriot Act, and not under the immediate shock of 9/11, it too was a remarkable document. Even though many disagree with some of its provisions, organizational structure, or the inclusion of FEMA as an agency within DHS, in creating DHS the Act accomplished the largest reorganization of government in more than fifty years. (See chapter 7 about DHS and chapter 8 about FEMA.)
The Homeland Security Act created DHS, brought FEMA under DHS control, and “transferred more than two‐dozen federal entities – some in their entirety, some only in part – and 180,000 employees to the new department.”49
From its inception, homeland security included an important focus on science and technology. Homeland security relies on technology for many purposes, including situational awareness, early detection and monitoring of weapons of mass destruction, and communication. DHS promotes the expedited development, acquisition, and introduction of new technology.
The Homeland Security Act mandated:
… that [DHS] agencies’ databases be compatible with one another and with other federal agencies.
It
established within the Department of Justice an Office of Science and Technology … to serve as the national focal point for work on law enforcement technology; and … to carry out programs that, through the provision of equipment, training, and technical assistance, improve the safety and effectiveness of law enforcement technology and improve access to such technology by Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies.50
The homeland security framework was designed and implemented at an extraordinarily rapid pace. For example, in addition to the Patriot Act coming only six weeks after 9/11, a particular HSPD would have deadlines for each subsequent step, such as the design or implementation of the related national strategy. For example, for the National Incident Management System (NIMS), first mentioned in HSPD 5, dated February 28, 2003, the Secretary of DHS was directed to have guidelines, standards, and protocols to implement NIMS by June 1, 2003. Each Federal Department was to have a plan to adopt and fully implement NIMS by August 1, 2003.
A FEW DEFINITIONS OF TERRORISM
There is no consensus as to the definition of terrorism.51
DHS52
(15) The term “terrorism” means any activity that—
involves an act that—
is dangerous to human life or potentially destructive of critical infrastructure or key resources; and
is a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State or other subdivision of the United States; and
appears to be intended—
to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping.
USA Patriot Act
Domestic Terrorism, § 802, codified at 18USC233153
(5) the term “domestic terrorism” means activities that—
involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
appear to be intended—
to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.
International Terrorism, 18 USC 2332b54
PROHIBITED ACTS.—
OFFENSES
.—Whoever, involving conduct transcending national boundaries and in a circumstance described in subsection (b)—
kills, kidnaps, maims, commits an assault resulting in serious bodily injury, or assaults with a dangerous weapon any person within the United States; or
creates a substantial risk of serious bodily injury to any other person by destroying or damaging any structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property within the United States or by attempting or conspiring to destroy or damage any structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property within the United States;
in violation of the laws of any State, or the United States, shall be punished as prescribed in subsection (c).
Treatment of threats, attempts and conspiracies.—Whoever threatens to commit an offense under paragraph (1), or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be punished under subsection (c).
JURISDICTIONAL BASES.—
CIRCUMSTANCES
.—The circumstances referred to in subsection (a) are—
the mail or any facility of interstate or foreign commerce is used in furtherance of the offense;
the offense obstructs, delays, or affects interstate or foreign commerce, or would have so obstructed, delayed, or affected interstate or foreign commerce if the offense had been consummated;
the victim, or intended victim, is the United States Government, a member of the uniformed services, or any official, officer, employee, or agent of the legislative, executive, or judicial branches, or of any department or agency, of the United States;
the structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property is, in whole or in part, owned, possessed, or leased to the United States, or any department or agency of the United States;
the offense is committed in the territorial sea (including the airspace above and the seabed and subsoil below, and artificial islands and fixed structures erected thereon) of the United States; or
the offense is committed within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States.
CO‐CONSPIRATORS AND ACCESSORIES AFTER THE FACT
.—Jurisdiction shall exist over all principals and co‐conspirators of an offense under this section, and accessories after the fact to any offense under this section, if at least one of the circumstances described in subparagraphs (A) through (F) of paragraph (1) is applicable to at least one offender.
CIA, State Department, 22 USC Sec. 2656f55
(d) DEFINITIONS
. As used in this section—
the term “international terrorism” means terrorism involving citizens or the territory of more than 1 country;
the term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents;
United Nations
The UN does not have an agreed upon definition of terrorism. On Dec. 9, 1994, however, Resolution 49/60,
56
“Measures to eliminate international terrorism” was adopted by the General Assembly, containing the following:
3. Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them.
On October 8, 2004, Security Council Resolution 1566
57
