In 2015, France was the target of two terrorist attacks, on 07 January against the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, which killed 12 people, and on 13 November against various locations in Paris, in which 130 people died. France may have a long history of terrorist attacks on its soil (Start GDT, 2017) but these two led to reactions of shock and dismay among the public and politicians. The first attack saw demonstrations throughout France, culminating in a mass gathering in Paris with many world leaders in attendance (Le Monde, 2015). The second attack, the deadliest on French soil since 1945, led the then President, the Socialist François Hollande, to declare France at war with terrorism (Hollande 2015). Pledging to "marshal the full strength of the state to defend the safety of its people" (Hollande 2015), he declared war on the Islamist State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and immediately proclaimed a state of emergency. First established during the Algeria war, it is a regime of exception granting the executive authorities a wide range of enhanced powers allowing them to bypass ordinary legal procedures in the name of responsiveness (Vie Publique 2018). In 2015, its main measures involved house arrest for anyone suspected to be a terrorist threat, police raid, ID control, house and car search, restricting freedom of movement, banning associations, closing down public places, including religious sites, and forbidding demonstrations (Vie Publique 2018). Most of these measures, based on a preemptive approach aimed at neutralising suspects before they act, applied to anyone for whom there were "serious reasons to believe that his/her behaviour constitutes a particularly serious threat to public security and public order" (Legifrance 2018). They also did not need the prior authorisation of a judge, with appeals only possible retrospectively and to administrative judges rather than penal ones, which under the French system gives fewer rights to the accused (De Massol De Rebetz and Van der Woude 2019, 14). Implemented through an enhanced deployment of armed and security forces and justified by the need to be "implacable […] in this new context of war" (Hollande 2015), it was renewed six times by the French Parliament and ended nearly two years later on 1 November 2017.The state of emergency proved contentious, both in terms of its necessity, when the authorities had a wide-ranging anti-terrorist legislation at their disposal, with 22 laws passed since 1986 (Vie Publique 2015), and in terms of its risks for liberties. A significant number of scholars, legal practioners, human rights associations, and some newspapers were highly critical and challenged four main aspects: 1) the enhanced repressive powers it gave to the state authorities, thereby putting liberties at risk (Bourdon 2017; Salas 2016a). 2) The expansion of the executive at the expense of the judiciary (Fédération Internationale des Droits de l'Homme 2016), thus blunting a key brake to executive power. 3) The lack of definition as to what the serious reasons t...