More hand wringing about the need for comprehensive repudiation of America’s culture of civil liberties. I figured the tone of this kind of talk would be winding down these days.

Our Constitution, Dershowitz writes, “was designed with the ‘reactive state’ in mind.” But now the state has taken on an ever-more-important preventive function, stopping terrorism before it can occur. Our legal system, however, has not caught up with this new function.

Torture warrants, Dershowitz insists, are one way to shine law’s light on this darkness, especially if one believes there are times when torture should be permitted.

“We need to develop a jurisprudence for the emerging preventive state. … Black holes in the law are anathema to democracy, accountability, human rights and the rule of law.”

How realistic is the specter of nuclear terrorism?
Are these changes necessary to prevent it, or is this just facism feeling around for a rationalization?
It seems to me that surveillance is more central to this preemptive law enforcement system than torture. Does Dershowitz also think we should have warrantless surveillance warrants?

To Torture or Not to Torture - Paper Cuts Blog - NYTimes.com