Skip to content

Tag Archives: Supreme Court

Supreme Court Denies Cert in Mehanna and Ali Cases

By
Monday, October 6, 2014 at 4:17 PM

It’s not just the same-sex marriage cases. The Supreme Court today also denied petitions for certiorari in a pair of cases we’ve been following. The first petition was from Tarek Mehanna, a Massachusetts man who was previously convicted for providing material support to a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2339. Andy Wang provided . . .
Read more »

Will the Supreme Court Take Up Mehanna?

By
Monday, September 29, 2014 at 7:30 AM

Does translating “radical” Arab texts and videos amount to material support for terrorism? That is the question that would face the Supreme Court, should they decide to take up Mehanna v. United States. (For full background and facts on the case, see our extensive prior coverage here.) The basic facts of Mehanna are simple. The . . .
Read more »

Supreme Court Denies EPIC Mandamus Petition

By
Monday, November 18, 2013 at 10:31 AM

The Supreme Court today denied the Electronic Privacy Information Center’s request for mandamus review of telephony metadata collection under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act. The denial order has neither dissent nor further explication. Josh Gerstein’s article in Politico provides good background on the case; for more information, see our previous post on this issue as well . . .
Read more »

Is the Supreme Court Likely to Rule on FISA Section 702?

By
Tuesday, October 29, 2013 at 7:00 AM

The Justice Department recently changed its policy on notice to criminal defendants about the use of evidence derived from surveillance under Section 702 of FISA. Press reports have treated the change as momentous, with the New York Times and the Associated Press predicting that the new policy will likely lead to a Supreme Court case . . .
Read more »

The Solicitor General Responds to an EPIC Mandamus Effort

By
Wednesday, October 23, 2013 at 12:00 PM

Having gained no purchase in federal district courts in countering NSA’s telephony metadata program, privacy activists are attempting a different strategy: taking the fight directly to the United States Supreme Court. Back in July, the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) filed a mandamus-or-certiorari petition with the high court, seeking review of the controversial April 2013 order by . . .
Read more »

“For the Rest of Time” — Really?

By
Wednesday, October 23, 2013 at 11:01 AM

How long will the enhanced security state in America last?  Apparently, some think it will be “for the rest of time.”  That has to be wrong. As readers of this blog know, I live on Capitol Hill and walk by the Supreme Court almost every day.  The Court building has been under renovation for what . . .
Read more »

Clapper Opinion Recap: Supreme Court Denies Standing to Challenge NSA Warantless Wiretapping

By
Tuesday, February 26, 2013 at 9:17 PM

As Wells reported, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Clapper v. Amnesty International USA this morning. By a 5–4 vote, it held that a group of human rights organizations, lawyers, activists, and journalists lacked standing to challenge the constitutionality of a congressionally authorized, warrantless government surveillance program. The surveillance program was authorized by the . . .
Read more »

Bond v. United States and the Treaty Power Debate

By
Sunday, January 27, 2013 at 10:40 PM

The Supreme Court recently agreed to hear an important case concerning the government’s foreign affairs powers, Bond v. United States.  That case, which involves a criminal prosecution under the Chemical Weapons Convention Implementation Act, raises fundamental issues about the relationship between the government’s authority to enter into treaties and constitutional principles of federalism.  I wrote . . .
Read more »

No, General Martins Has Not “Gone Rogue”

By
Sunday, January 27, 2013 at 8:56 AM

The New York Times has a news analysis piece by this morning the excellent Charlie Savage, which requires a moment’s reflection. Charlie is about as good a reporter as there is out there on Lawfare-related matters, and he has broken most of the stories related to the internal machinations within the executive branch over the future of . . .
Read more »

Anonymous Hacks U.S. Sentencing Commission Website, Declares “War” on U.S. Government

By and
Saturday, January 26, 2013 at 8:57 AM

That’s the cyber news from Mashable.com.  From the site’s report—which elsewhere says the attack was intended as retaliation for the prosecution of Aaron Swartz:  The hacktivist group Anonymous hacked the US federal sentencing website early Saturday, using the page to make a brazen and boisterous declaration of “war” on the U.S. government. The group claims mysterious code-based . . .
Read more »

Military Commission Prosecutor’s Filings Regarding 9/11 Conspiracy Charges

By
Saturday, January 26, 2013 at 8:39 AM

The Guantánamo military commissions yesterday released—after a security review—a pair of important filings by the Office of the Chief Prosecutor (OCP), regarding the ongoing controversy over the conspiracy charges against the five 9/11 defendants. (For background, see our prior coverage here, here, and here; and Chief Prosecutor Brig. Gen. Mark Martins’s podcast with Ben on the decision . . .
Read more »

What to Make of Judge Pohl’s Ruling? Letter Filings in Al-Nashiri v. MacDonald

By
Friday, January 25, 2013 at 3:50 PM

What, if anything, do developments in the military commission case of United States v. al-Nashiri portend for Al-Nashiri v. MacDonald, an ongoing, civil challenge to the accused’s war crimes prosecution?  The question arises in letters filed in the civil case, one by the United States last Friday, and another by al-Nashiri’s lawyers  today. Some quick background: . . .
Read more »

No USG Appeal in Hamdan; Stay Tuned for al-Bahlul

By
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 11:22 PM

We end the evening with this procedural nugget from Jess Bravin of the Wall Street Journal: in Hamdan II, the deadline for the United States to seek en banc review from the D.C. Circuit, or a writ of certiorari from the Supreme Court, came and went.  The last day for further court challenge in that case, by . . .
Read more »

What the Convening Authority’s Decision Means: Withdrawal Is off the Table, but Dismissal Is Still an Option

By
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 5:23 PM

As Wells noted, the Guantánamo Military Commission Convening Authority has declined to adopt Chief Prosecutor Brig. Gen. Mark Martins’s recommendation to withdraw the conspiracy charges against Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the other 9/11 defendants. Withdrawal, which can be done for any reason and at any time prior to trial findings being announced, would normally lead . . .
Read more »

Convening Authority Rejects Prosecution Bid to Dismiss Conspiracy Charges in the 9/11 Case

By
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 2:55 PM

Whoa. Remember the Chief Prosecutor’s tactical recommendation to pull standalone conspiracy charges in the 9/11 case—in light of the D.C. Circuit’s analysis in Hamdan II, and the strong likelihood that the same court (or the Supreme Court) would follow Hamdan II, and invalidate conspiracy as a commission offense with respect to pre-2006 conduct? Well, the military commissions’ Convening . . .
Read more »

Charging Decisions After Hamdan II and Al-Bahlul: Al-Nashiri Seeks to Dismiss Conspiracy and Terrorism Charges

By
Monday, January 14, 2013 at 8:40 PM

Reported on Friday by the Miami Herald’s Carol Rosenberg: defense attorneys in United States v. Al-Nashiri filed a renewed motion to dismiss the conspiracy charge against their client.  At the same time, the lawyers reactivated an earlier request to throw out a terrorism charge from the capital commission case, one of two ongoing at Guantanamo. The . . .
Read more »

Terrorists, Pirates, and Drug Traffickers: Customary International Law and U.S. Criminal Prosecutions

By
Friday, January 11, 2013 at 10:34 AM

As I discuss in my forthcoming book, International Law in the U.S. Legal System, regardless of whether customary international law has the status of self-executing federal law, it can play an important role in U.S. litigation.  The invocation of customary international law in civil suits brought under the Alien Tort Statute is of course well . . .
Read more »

Judicial Review for Enemy Fighters? Andrew Kent on the Quirin Case

By
Friday, January 4, 2013 at 11:00 AM

Andrew Kent writes in with the following guest post on his fascinating new article on Ex Parte Quirin. I asked Andrew to write up this piece, after reading an earlier draft of the underlying paper for a workshop last summer that Matt and Trevor organized at Columbia Law School. I found both the history Andrew . . .
Read more »

Readings: Andrew Kent on Ex Parte Quirin

By
Friday, January 4, 2013 at 8:48 AM

Andrew Kent (Fordham University School of Law) has posted a new paper to SSRN, “Judicial Review for Enemy Fighters: The Court’s Fateful Turn in Ex Parte Quirin, the Nazi Saboteur Case.”  (66 Vanderbilt Law Review 101 (2013).) Professor Kent will be guest-posting about the article, so the Readings post will be brief, but we wanted . . .
Read more »

Readings: David Skeel on Religion and the US Military

By
Sunday, December 30, 2012 at 3:20 PM

University of Pennsylvania law professor David Skeel has an important opinion piece in the December 28, 2012 Wall Street Journal on the role of religion in the US military, “The Military Balance of Faith and Freedom: A West Point cadet resigns over religiosity at the Academy, but other cadets have rights, too.” (For those of . . .
Read more »