Anti terrorism, Policy, Resistance 

In the early days after September 11, a number of states
moved quickly to enact various forms of strengthened antiterrorism
legislation—some expanding the de‹nition of terrorism
in state law and strengthening punishments, others adopting
new measures on emergencies and public health, and some
engaging in vigorous debate about providing law enforcement
with new wiretapping and surveillance tools. These moves did
not occur in an empty playing ‹eld, for a number of states had
already begun addressing terrorism-related issues in the 1990s.
In Illinois, for example, where several heavily scrutinized Muslim
American charitable organizations were based, the legislature
had passed a law in 1996 that criminalized solicitation of
or providing support for “international terrorism.” California
had adopted legislation against manufacturing, possessing,
using, or threatening to use “weapons of mass destruction” in
1999, as well as against possession of some biological agents.1
 

29 p.; 20 cm