Combating Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction

Department of JusticeCombating proliferation of weapons of mass destruction is essentially a national securityissue, but one in which law-enforcement tools can be particularly useful for promotingdeterrence, blocking certain proliferation activities, and organizing for response to theiruse. In its response to the Commission’s baseline survey, the Department of Justice (DoJ)stated that it does not have a specific proliferation-related mission. The Commissionbelieves, however, that the Attorney General’s role as the nation’s chief law-enforcementofficer and principal law-enforcement advisor to the President puts the Department in aunique position to help ensure that appropriate enforcement efforts are targeted againstthis threat.Legal Authorities for Combating Catastrophic TerrorismProtecting citizens in a democracy necessarily involves striking an often difficult balancebetween the risks to public safety presented by the threat and the risks to constitutionalliberties posed by the means of protection. In the context of terrorist use of nuclear,chemical, or biological weapons (sometimes referred to as “catastrophic” terrorism),analyses of this balance and its implications do not appear to have been either carefully orthoroughly made. Certain logistics of domestic response have been discussed, but therehas been no sustained public debate on the nature of the catastrophic terrorism threat andthe measures that, as a nation, we are willing to accept to prevent or respond to it.In the case of either a known imminent threat or an actual use of weapons of massdestruction, whether overseas or at home, enormous pressures would be brought on boththe President and Congress to move quickly and decisively. Thorough analyses of (1) thepublic safety needs and (2) the legal options available for meeting those needs, should beundertaken now, not in the wake of a credible threat or devastating deployment.Consultations with Congress on executive branch planning should also take place now.Recommendation 5.27: The National Director should work with the AttorneyGeneral to determine the legal authorities needed to deal with the threats fromcatastrophic terrorism.This should include a thorough assessment of the appropriate balance, in light of thepresent threat environment, between investigative tools and authorities and concerns forcivil liberties. It should also determine whether we have the authorities needed to respondto a heightened threat environment, such as receipt of a credible threat of a terrorist useof a biological weapon or an actual attack. Such a situation could generate increasedpublic support for greater federal authorities, but it also carries the risk of overreaction. Itis important to consider carefully, in advance, what measures might be justified in such a80