Quotes About Law

The way to defeat international terrorism is through international cooperation based on international law, clear intelligence, and a measured and appropriate military response.

It would be easy to define terrorism as attacks against human rights and international humanitarian law forbids attacks against innocent non-combatants which is often the definition used for terrorism.

Islamic law is clearly against terrorism, against any kind of deliberate killing of civilians or similar 'collateral damage.'

I'm prepared to say that law enforcement should be allowed to seize the guns of those who are suspected to be involved in domestic terrorism.

Terrorism is not a matter that can be left to law enforcement, with its deliberative process, built-in delays, and safeguards that may let the prisoner go free on procedural grounds.

Historically, terrorism falls in a category different from crimes that concern a criminal court judge.

The American People will come first once again. My plan will begin with safety at home - which means safe neighborhoods, secure borders, and protection from terrorism. There can be no prosperity without law and order.

The Obama administration, seemingly without any concern or worry, funneled money around U.S. law through foreign central banks to provide a state sponsor of terrorism with $400 million in blood money for American hostages.

President Obama's decision not to go to Congress for help in establishing reasonable standards for the continued detention of Guantanamo detainees is a failure of leadership in the project of putting American law on a sound basis for a long-term confrontation with terrorism. It is bad for the country, for national security, and for civil liberties.

From my experience both as DPP and previously as a human rights lawyer, I know that human rights and effective protection from terrorism are not incompatible. On the contrary, they go hand in hand.

Donald Trump has come under fire for recommending U.S. citizens accused of terrorism be prosecuted before military tribunals. But despite the criticism, Trump's concerns are not only merited - they are, in fact, within the bounds of the law.

Right now, American law bars the admission of aliens suspected of terrorist activity - but not of terrorist sympathies.

Preventing terrorist attacks is of the highest important, but trashing the Constitution is not the right way to do it.

It's not law-abiding gun owners that are the problem here - it's Islamic terrorists.

It is also worth asking whether the strict limitations of Geneva make sense in a war against terrorists.

The very controversial National Identification Act of 1991, requiring all United States citizens to carry identification, has greatly enhanced the ability of law enforcement officers to identify criminals and terrorists.

The time has come for President Obama to formally rescind his order to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay and end his irresponsible allegations of injustices at the facility, which operates in a framework that respects the rule of law, keeps terrorists off American soil, and bolsters our national security.

In full accordance with the law - and in order to prevent terrorist attacks on the United States and to save American lives - the United States government conducts targeted strikes against specific al-Qa'ida terrorists, sometimes using remotely piloted aircraft, often referred to publicly as drones.

All terrorists must face the full force of the law.

The acid test of any legal system is not the greatness or the grandeur of its ideal concepts, but whether, in fact, it is able to produce order and justice.

Not that pleading can be taken as a test, for the forms of action, notably Debt, ignore the fundamental difference between duties imposed by law and duties created by the will of the parties.

There's no religious test under the constitution. That's what it says. Period.

The prospect of many new states formed out of the West should make New Jersey pause; these states would undoubtedly enter the Union "when they contained but few inhabitants. If they should be entitled to vote according to their proportions of inhabitants, all would be right and safe." But let them "have an equal vote, and a more objectionable minority than ever might give law to the whole.

Trying to put someone in prison for making a fart joke seemed far more likely to produce more courtroom laughter, more sensational acquittals, and a lot more fart jokes.