You have not been recognized as a subscriber to JAH online. About 180 words from this article are provided below; about 367 words remain.
 
If you are a individual member of the Organization of American Historians, you may:
• login here if you have already registered for online access.
• Or if you're already logged in register your subscription.
• Set up your online account for the first time.

If you are not a member of the Organization of American Historians, you can:
• Join the OAH and receive many member benefits including print and electronic issues of the Journal of American History.
• Purchase a research pass to gain two-hour access to the entire History Cooperative web site. You will have full access to current issues of the Journal of American History (86.1-present). Note: the Research Pass does not provide access to JSTOR's holdings of the Journal of American History.

Instititutions can:
•  Subscribe to this journal and receive print and electronic issues.
• Activate your existing subscription so that we recognize your IP number ranges.
| Book Review | The Journal of American History, 91.1 | The History Cooperative
91.1  
Journals link Search link Partners link Information link
June, 2004
Previous
Next
The Journal of American History

Table of Contents
List journal issues
Home
Get a printer-friendly version of this page
 


Book Review



Nazi Saboteurs on Trial: A Military Tribunal and American Law. By Louis Fisher. (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2003. xviii, 193 pp. $29.95, ISBN 0-7006-1238-6.)

Louis Fisher's account of the Supreme Court case of Ex parte Quirin (1942) could not be more timely. Most scholars who have written about the landing of eight Nazi would-be saboteurs on these shores, their quick capture, the Court's denial of their petition for access to civilian courts, and their trial and condemnation by a military tribunal have concluded that the Court cravenly deferred to the executive branch and in the process struck a serious blow against the rule of law. Alpheus Thomas Mason, for one, declared that "the judiciary was in danger of becoming part of an executive juggernaut" ("Inter Arma Silent Leges," Harvard Law Review, March 1956, p. 806). For Mason and other scholars, the issue was not whether the bumbling conspirators were guilty of crimes against the United States, but whether the executive branch's actions violated the Constitution and what the judiciary should have done in response. . . .

There are about 367 more words in this article. Please log in (or, if you are not yet an authorized user, please go to the User Setup page) to gain full access rights. Or if you're already logged in register your subscription.