Insofar as the purpose of modern law is to secure the freedom of the individual, meaning that modern law is thus a right of freedom, the question arises as to how this right of freedom relates to fear. The article first refers to the narrative of religion as a regime of fear, which is historically related to the narrative of peace through law. After analysing the religious technique of increasing and escalating the irrational and derailing moment of fear (by referring to Søren Kierkegaard and Rudolf Otto), it contrasts the religious regime of fear with the modern regime of fear in the form of law and interprets the latter as an order of immunization against fear, i.e., as a technique of securing domination by ‘taking in the hostile other’ at the price of its division (Isabell Lorey). In this perspective, law appears as a secularized version of the religiously driven escalation of fear; within the framework of a secular order of immanence it seeks to immobilize the relationship to the indeterminate and extraordinary as cultivated by fear in its abysmal nature. Consequently, fear returns to the realm of religion and superstition assigned to it in enlightened modernity. But, disturbingly, in pandemic society it continues to haunt the belief in the reality-assuring power of the normative legal order in the form of the intensifying fear of the ‘enemy in the body’.