Why have some democratic states maintained their civil liberties in times of emergency while other states have seen serious infringements of civil liberties? The key variable in explaining this variation is not the extent of the emergency provisions, but whether the measures themselves undermined the institutional constraints (the legislature, judiciary, and the press) that might have protected civil liberties. This distinction challenges the very notion that there is a tradeoff between liberties and security. With extensive oversight over the use of emergency powers, those powers can be broad enough to be effective, yet still be relatively safe for democracy and liberty.