Prévenir ou punir ? Expertise et justice préventive dans la « guerre contre la terreur » aux États-Unis : l’affaire Mehanna
Based upon a study of the trial of Tarek Mehanna, a young American of Egyptian descent, who was convicted of terrorist conspiracy in April 2012 and sentenced to seventeen years and a half in prison, this article examines the role of experts and social scientists in the legal construction of the cate...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Les Éditions de la Maison des Sciences de l’Homme
2014-09-01
|
Series: | Socio |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://journals.openedition.org/socio/622 |
id |
doaj-f44b9dccf48344f1b432ee96adf09785 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-f44b9dccf48344f1b432ee96adf097852020-11-25T02:49:13ZengLes Éditions de la Maison des Sciences de l’HommeSocio2266-31342425-21582014-09-01310313610.4000/socio.622Prévenir ou punir ? Expertise et justice préventive dans la « guerre contre la terreur » aux États-Unis : l’affaire MehannaNadia MarzoukiBased upon a study of the trial of Tarek Mehanna, a young American of Egyptian descent, who was convicted of terrorist conspiracy in April 2012 and sentenced to seventeen years and a half in prison, this article examines the role of experts and social scientists in the legal construction of the category of terrorism. The object of this paper is not to attempt to measure the influence of expert witnesses on law, but, rather, to understand how the political logic of preventing terrorism functions. This logic, I will argue, informs the practice of social scientists, judges and lawyers. This article also explores the debates about the interpretation of the First Amendment in the context of the War on Terror. It analyses the current struggles to establish distinctions between what counts as free speech and what is seen as constituting dangerous thought, or between free religious practice and practice that is deemed radical and suspect.http://journals.openedition.org/socio/622expertiseterrorism1st amendmentradicalisationfreedom of expressionsocial sciences |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Nadia Marzouki |
spellingShingle |
Nadia Marzouki Prévenir ou punir ? Expertise et justice préventive dans la « guerre contre la terreur » aux États-Unis : l’affaire Mehanna Socio expertise terrorism 1st amendment radicalisation freedom of expression social sciences |
author_facet |
Nadia Marzouki |
author_sort |
Nadia Marzouki |
title |
Prévenir ou punir ? Expertise et justice préventive dans la « guerre contre la terreur » aux États-Unis : l’affaire Mehanna |
title_short |
Prévenir ou punir ? Expertise et justice préventive dans la « guerre contre la terreur » aux États-Unis : l’affaire Mehanna |
title_full |
Prévenir ou punir ? Expertise et justice préventive dans la « guerre contre la terreur » aux États-Unis : l’affaire Mehanna |
title_fullStr |
Prévenir ou punir ? Expertise et justice préventive dans la « guerre contre la terreur » aux États-Unis : l’affaire Mehanna |
title_full_unstemmed |
Prévenir ou punir ? Expertise et justice préventive dans la « guerre contre la terreur » aux États-Unis : l’affaire Mehanna |
title_sort |
prévenir ou punir ? expertise et justice préventive dans la « guerre contre la terreur » aux états-unis : l’affaire mehanna |
publisher |
Les Éditions de la Maison des Sciences de l’Homme |
series |
Socio |
issn |
2266-3134 2425-2158 |
publishDate |
2014-09-01 |
description |
Based upon a study of the trial of Tarek Mehanna, a young American of Egyptian descent, who was convicted of terrorist conspiracy in April 2012 and sentenced to seventeen years and a half in prison, this article examines the role of experts and social scientists in the legal construction of the category of terrorism. The object of this paper is not to attempt to measure the influence of expert witnesses on law, but, rather, to understand how the political logic of preventing terrorism functions. This logic, I will argue, informs the practice of social scientists, judges and lawyers. This article also explores the debates about the interpretation of the First Amendment in the context of the War on Terror. It analyses the current struggles to establish distinctions between what counts as free speech and what is seen as constituting dangerous thought, or between free religious practice and practice that is deemed radical and suspect. |
topic |
expertise terrorism 1st amendment radicalisation freedom of expression social sciences |
url |
http://journals.openedition.org/socio/622 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT nadiamarzouki preveniroupunirexpertiseetjusticepreventivedanslaguerrecontrelaterreurauxetatsunislaffairemehanna |
_version_ |
1724744946012913664 |