INSTITUTE FOR THE STUDY OF STATES OF EXCEPTION
Understanding Exceptional Governance.
Strengthening Constitutional Guardrails.
The Institute for the Study of States of Exception (ISSE) was founded in response to a troubling global trend: the increasing normalization of extraordinary governmental powers and the misuse and abuse of executive emergency authorities to erode constitutional governance, weaken democratic accountability, and undermine the rule of law. As an independent, nonpartisan research institute, ISSE advances interdisciplinary scholarship, comparative analysis, and public engagement to strengthen understanding of exceptional governance while developing practical resources, fostering international collaboration, and building the intellectual foundations that support constitutional resilience.
Explore our work, contribute to the conversation, and support our mission advancing scholarship, strengthening constitutional guardrails, and preserving rule of law during times of crisis.
“The state of exception appears to have become the rule, not only in the legal sense but in the structural sense of how power operates today.”
— Achille Mbembe (Necropolitics, 2003)
Featured Content:
Five years after President Kais Saied invoked emergency powers and suspended Tunisia’s parliament, this article examines the country’s subsequent shift toward concentrated executive rule, political repression, international isolation, and economic vulnerability. It also considers how the United States and Europe might reengage Tunisia and support reform while confronting the lasting institutional consequences of a state of exception that evolved into a broader transformation of constitutional governance.
The Brennan Center’s Joseph Nunn examines the prolonged deployment of National Guard forces in Washington, D.C., arguing that the more significant constitutional issue is not the initial invocation of emergency authority but the normalization of a sustained military role in civilian governance. The article explores broader questions about the temporal limits of emergency powers, the domestic use of military forces, and the constitutional risks that arise when exceptional measures become part of ordinary government practice.
This podcast by Blood Work provides an accessible and in-depth introduction to Achille Mbembe's theory of necropolitics, exploring how sovereignty, violence, and exceptional power shape the conditions under which some lives are protected while others become exposed to abandonment or death. By situating Mbembe's work within the broader traditions of Schmitt, Foucault, and Agamben, the discussion offers valuable context for understanding contemporary debates about states of exception, emergency governance, and the exercise of sovereign power.
Janos Mark Szakolczai examines how information generated during seemingly ordinary or peaceful conditions can become a latent instrument of coercion, surveillance, and warfare when political circumstances change. Drawing on the concept of capta, Agamben’s state of exception, and examples ranging from the Prague Spring to contemporary AI-enabled security systems, the article explores how exceptional powers can become embedded in enduring data infrastructures long after the circumstances that produced them have changed.
The Financial Times featured the Institute for the Study of States of Exception in its August 10, 2026 international edition as part of a front-page article examining contemporary debates over executive power and democratic governance. ISSE's contribution focused on the Institute's nonpartisan research into emergency powers and our ongoing analysis of the legal authorities that could be invoked during a future U.S. election-related crisis.
This article introduces the concept of "digital preparedness" to explain how emergency-driven digital infrastructures created during the COVID-19 pandemic can become permanent features of ordinary governance, reshaping the relationship between data, executive authority, and individual rights. Through a detailed case study of Norway's preparedness registry, the authors explore how crisis responses may accelerate lasting institutional and regulatory change, offering a new framework for understanding exceptional governance in the digital age.
Through the Polish Kamiński and Wąsik case, Michał Stambulski develops the concept of "sovereign presidential lawfare," examining how constitutionally grounded presidential powers can be used to reshape the balance between the executive and judiciary without formally changing the constitutional order. The article offers a valuable framework for understanding how exceptional executive authorities may gradually transform democratic governance through legally authorized but structurally significant interventions.
Drawing on Poland's own experience recovering from democratic backsliding, investigative journalist Wojciech Cieśla examines the institutional challenges Hungary faces following the end of Viktor Orbán's sixteen years in power. The article explores the difficult process of rebuilding courts, media, and constitutional institutions after prolonged executive consolidation, offering important insights into how democracies recover from periods of exceptional governance.
This article by ISSE Research Fellow Yuvraj Tuli, published in Just Security, examines how courts should distinguish between legitimate national security judgments and the use of national security authorities as a pretext for unrelated political or administrative objectives. It explores when judicial deference to executive claims of national security is warranted, and when constitutional accountability requires more searching judicial review.
This article examines El Salvador's prolonged State of Exception, arguing that while extraordinary emergency powers may have been legally justified when first adopted to confront unprecedented gang violence, their continued renewal after the crisis has substantially diminished raises serious constitutional and international legal concerns. The article explores one of the defining questions of emergency governance: when temporary emergency powers cease to be exceptional and instead become part of ordinary government.
Beginning with President Yoon Suk Yeol's failed December 2024 martial law declaration, this article examines how populist movements can evolve from constitutionally constrained forms of political leadership into more radical efforts to override democratic institutions through extraordinary executive powers. The study highlights the relationship between populist crisis narratives, emergency authority, and democratic resilience, demonstrating how constitutional institutions can both constrain and ultimately reverse exceptional exercises of executive power.
In this new book, ISSE Senior Fellow Samuel Mace critically examines Carl Schmitt's theory of decisionism through the political experience of the modern Middle East, arguing that regimes built upon exceptional authority often generate long-term instability rather than durable political order. The book offers a significant contribution to the study of states of exception by reassessing one of the twentieth century's most influential theorists of emergency power while illuminating the practical consequences of decisionist governance.
As of July 7, 2026, Indian authorities have renewed the delegation of preventive detention powers under the National Security Act, allowing designated officials to order detention without ordinary criminal charges during a period of heightened political sensitivity following nationwide protests. The case illustrates how extraordinary executive powers can be exercised through standing statutory authorities rather than formally declared constitutional emergencies, highlighting an increasingly important form of embedded exceptionality within ordinary governance.
Following Péter Magyar's decisive electoral victory over Viktor Orbán, Kim Lane Scheppele examines the formidable legal and institutional obstacles to restoring constitutional democracy after sixteen years of executive consolidation, institutional capture, and prolonged emergency governance. The article explores the challenge of de-exceptionalization—the difficult process of dismantling entrenched systems of exceptional governance and rebuilding democratic institutions capable of resisting future authoritarian relapse.
The Roman statesman Cincinnatus has long symbolized the constitutional principle that extraordinary powers should be exercised only when genuinely necessary and relinquished once the crisis has passed. His enduring legacy illustrates one of the oldest and most important safeguards of constitutional government: that emergency authority derives its legitimacy not only from necessity, but from its temporary character.
The EMERGE Project at Ghent University examines how emergency powers have shaped European constitutional orders, legal institutions, and political cultures over the past century, challenging the assumption that emergencies leave no lasting constitutional legacy. The project demonstrates how exceptional governance can become embedded within ordinary legal systems, offering important historical context for understanding the evolution and normalization of emergency powers today.
In this discussion hosted by the American Enterprise Institute, John Yoo, William Galston, and Ilya Somin examine competing constitutional theories of executive power, separation of powers, independent agencies, war powers, and the original understanding of Article II against the backdrop of major Supreme Court cases concerning the unitary executive. The panel explores enduring questions about the constitutional limits of presidential authority and how competing interpretations of executive power continue to shape American constitutional governance.
Drawing on case studies from Vienna, Austria, and Nusaybin, Turkey, Ayşe Çaglar examines how emergency laws governing displaced populations reshape authority between municipal and national governments, often expanding executive control over urban governance long after an immediate crisis begins. The article demonstrates that emergency powers frequently transform not only the governance of displaced populations but also the institutional distribution of authority itself, creating durable changes in how cities, states, and executive power interact.
Beginning with South Korea’s failed December 2024 martial law declaration, which was rapidly reversed through legislative resistance and public mobilization, Christopher Carothers argues that Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan remain resilient democracies while exhibiting distinct warning signs of erosion: overcentralized power in Japan, severe polarization in South Korea, and sustained Chinese interference in Taiwan. The article shows both how democratic institutions can withstand an acute abuse of emergency power and how quieter patterns of norm violation, institutional manipulation, and partisan control can continue to weaken constitutional governance over time.
On July 23, 2026, Spain activated an Emergency of National Interest for the first time in response to a wildfire crisis, temporarily centralizing national coordination of disaster response as fires spread across multiple autonomous communities during an intense heat wave. The declaration illustrates how democratic governments can reallocate operational authority through existing statutory emergency frameworks while leaving the constitutional order and ordinary civil liberties intact, highlighting an increasingly important model of emergency governance in an era of climate-driven disasters.
Five years after President Kais Saied invoked emergency powers and suspended Tunisia’s parliament, this article examines the country’s subsequent shift toward concentrated executive rule, political repression, international isolation, and economic vulnerability. It also considers how the United States and Europe might reengage Tunisia and support reform while confronting the lasting institutional consequences of a state of exception that evolved into a broader transformation of constitutional governance.
The Brennan Center’s Joseph Nunn examines the prolonged deployment of National Guard forces in Washington, D.C., arguing that the more significant constitutional issue is not the initial invocation of emergency authority but the normalization of a sustained military role in civilian governance. The article explores broader questions about the temporal limits of emergency powers, the domestic use of military forces, and the constitutional risks that arise when exceptional measures become part of ordinary government practice.
This podcast by Blood Work provides an accessible and in-depth introduction to Achille Mbembe's theory of necropolitics, exploring how sovereignty, violence, and exceptional power shape the conditions under which some lives are protected while others become exposed to abandonment or death. By situating Mbembe's work within the broader traditions of Schmitt, Foucault, and Agamben, the discussion offers valuable context for understanding contemporary debates about states of exception, emergency governance, and the exercise of sovereign power.
Janos Mark Szakolczai examines how information generated during seemingly ordinary or peaceful conditions can become a latent instrument of coercion, surveillance, and warfare when political circumstances change. Drawing on the concept of capta, Agamben’s state of exception, and examples ranging from the Prague Spring to contemporary AI-enabled security systems, the article explores how exceptional powers can become embedded in enduring data infrastructures long after the circumstances that produced them have changed.
The Financial Times featured the Institute for the Study of States of Exception in its August 10, 2026 international edition as part of a front-page article examining contemporary debates over executive power and democratic governance. ISSE's contribution focused on the Institute's nonpartisan research into emergency powers and our ongoing analysis of the legal authorities that could be invoked during a future U.S. election-related crisis.
This article introduces the concept of "digital preparedness" to explain how emergency-driven digital infrastructures created during the COVID-19 pandemic can become permanent features of ordinary governance, reshaping the relationship between data, executive authority, and individual rights. Through a detailed case study of Norway's preparedness registry, the authors explore how crisis responses may accelerate lasting institutional and regulatory change, offering a new framework for understanding exceptional governance in the digital age.
Through the Polish Kamiński and Wąsik case, Michał Stambulski develops the concept of "sovereign presidential lawfare," examining how constitutionally grounded presidential powers can be used to reshape the balance between the executive and judiciary without formally changing the constitutional order. The article offers a valuable framework for understanding how exceptional executive authorities may gradually transform democratic governance through legally authorized but structurally significant interventions.
Drawing on Poland's own experience recovering from democratic backsliding, investigative journalist Wojciech Cieśla examines the institutional challenges Hungary faces following the end of Viktor Orbán's sixteen years in power. The article explores the difficult process of rebuilding courts, media, and constitutional institutions after prolonged executive consolidation, offering important insights into how democracies recover from periods of exceptional governance.