Analyses the ways American leaders have justified the use of military tribunals, the suspension of due process, and the elimination of habeas corpus. The author examines the major legal cases that show how various generations have represented the need for military tribunals, and how officials historically have applied the term "necessity."

Further, General MacArthur's tribunal to investigate the wartime activities of Japanese General Yamashita raised the specter of "victor's justice," anticipating the outcry that attended the Nuremberg trials. In those cases as in current debates about the prosecution of terrorists, Hasian argues that the past is often cited selectively, neglecting historical contexts and the controversies these cases engendered.