And that was over a decade ago.
http://www.alandershowitz.com/publications/docs/torturewarrants.html
The Case for Torture Warrants
by Alan M. Dershowitz
2002
Now that it has been disclosed that our government had information of “undetermined reliability”, from an agent whose code name is Dragonfire, that New York City may have been targeted for a 10 kiloton nuclear weapon, the arguments for empowering law enforcement officials to do everything necessary to prevent a catastrophic terrorist attack are becoming more compelling. In the immediate aftermath of the September 11th attacks, FBI officials leaked a story about their inability to obtain information from suspected terrorists by conventional means, such as buying the information by offers of cash or leniency, or compelling the information by grants of immunity and threats of imprisonment for contempt of court. Those who leaked the story suggested that there may come a time when law enforcement officials might have to resort to unconventional means, including non-lethal torture. Thus began one of the most unusual debates in American legal and political history: should law enforcement be authorized to torture suspects who are thought to have information about a ticking bomb?
... half a millennium ago torture warrants were part of the law of Great Britain. They could be sought only in cases involving grave threats to the Crown or the Empire and were granted in about one case a year. Judges even in those times, were extremely reluctant to authorize the thumb screw.
Why then should we even think about returning to an old practice that was abolished in England many years ago. The reason is because if we ever did have a ticking bomb case - - especially a ticking nuclear bomb case - - law enforcement officials would in fact resort to physical force, even torture, as a last resort. In speaking to numerous audiences since September 11th - - audiences reflecting the entire breadth of the political and ideological spectrum - - I have asked for a show of hands as to how many would favor the use of non-lethal torture in an actual ticking bomb case. The vast majority of audience members responded in the affirmative. So have law enforcement officials to whom I have spoken. If it is true that torture would in fact be used in such a case, then the important question becomes: is it better to have such torture done under the table, off the books and below the radar screen - - or in full view, with accountability and as part of our legal system?
= new reply since forum marked as read
