Chapter 1 - Introduction
What are the issues of the day?
Why does national security pose special legal problems?
What are past abuses of national security law?
What are current practices that may be seen as abuses in the future?
Wisdom v. Legality
What did de Tocqueville mean when he said that Americans confused the question of the existence of a power with the wisdom of its use?
Should these be distinguished?
How is national security law like public health law?
How do the problems of federal national security law resemble the problems of state public health law?
Why was this parallel especially strong when the Constitution was written?
What modern concerns bring back these same issues?
Chapter 2 - Providing for the ‘‘Common Defense’’: The Original Understanding
How were most countries governed in the 1400s?
What were the justifications for this form of government?
What did the legal philosophers argue were better forms of government?
Why was separation of powers key to these arguments?
The Nature of War
What is the history of war?
Politics by other means?
What is Formal War?
What is Informal War?
Why does Informal War pose much more difficult issues for international affairs and international law?
What is the role of the state v. private parties?
What were letters of marque and reprisal?
Are wars waged by private parties now?
What is the role of private contractors and mercenaries in Iraq?
What additional issue are posed by mercenaries?
The Colonial experience
How were the colonies governed?
How much control did England really exercise over day to day affairs?
What was the colonial experience with standing armies?
What are the risks of a standing army?
Independence
What was the legal status of the colonies when they declared independence?
The Continental Congress
How was the country governed between independence and the Articles of Confederation?
What was the fundamental flaw in this system?
Why did it almost cost us the revolution?
The Articles of Confederation
What was the role of the states versus the federal government in the Articles of Confederation?
Why did this make it difficult to govern the country?
What external threats were still facing the US?
Did we control the continent?
Were the European powers at peace?
The Constitution
How did the drafters deal with the problems seen during the Continental Congress era?
What was the relationship between the states and the federal government in the original Constitution?
How were powers shared?
What were the founders expectations about the federal government?
How did the shape the Constitution?
Federal Separation of Powers
Three Branches of Government
Legislative
Judicial
Executive
How was separation of powers to protect the nation?
Did the founders anticipate having two branches controlled by the same political party?
Then Versus Now
How has the federal government changed?
What are the critical periods for this change?
Why does this pose Constitutional problems?
War in the Constitution
Why is the nature of war as understood by the drafters important?
What does this tell us about the congressional power to declare war?
Is this separate from the power to wage war?
What about defensive war?
Why is defensive war a special philosophical and religious issue?
Organization of the Military
What fundamental change in the organization of the military was not anticipated by the drafters and which undermines the Constitutional control of war making?
Why does it matter that the congress can now allow a war to be started without having to do it themselves?
Review of Constitutional Provisions
Congress - Article I, Section 8
http://biotech.law.lsu.edu/cases/adlaw/constitution.htm#con1.8.11
President - Article II, Section 2
http://biotech.law.lsu.edu/cases/adlaw/constitution.htm#con2.2
Ambiguous - Habeas Corpus - Article I, Section 9
http://biotech.law.lsu.edu/cases/adlaw/constitution.htm#con1.9.2
Chapter 3 - The Gloss of History: An Introduction to the Separation of National Security Powers
Learning Objectives
Does the provision of a statutory process implicitly disapprove alternative processes?
How do we make sense of multiple opinions based on different assumptions?
Is Youngstown strong precedent, or just a case driven by special facts?
What do post 9/11 events tell us about current meaning of Youngstown?
The Korean War
Map of Korea and the Military Intrusions
Did the US declare war?
What was the role of the UN?
What is the historical significance of this response?
Is the war popular in 1952?
How well did it work out?
What is the current status of North Korea?
Truman
How did Truman become president?
What was famous about his 1948 reelection?
How popular was he?
Why should this matter?
Is there a parallel with the current national security cases before the court?
This case took place in 1952
Why might that be important?
Background of the Seizure
Why is steel production a national security issue?
What factors might influence this analysis?
What did the court know from the papers that might have affected their decision?
What prompted Truman to seize the mills?
Legal Framework
Did Congress authorize the seizure of the steel industry?
Who is expected to bear the cost of the seizure and operate the mills?
The Taft-Hartley Act 
What is the history of strikes and the role of the government that underlies the Taft-Hartley Act?
What can the president do under the Act to deal with a strike?
Does this provision amount to an implicit rejection of other interventions, such as injunctions?
What is your reasoning?
Review of Executive Branch Orders
Executive orders (Youngstown)
National Security Decision Directive - NSDD
Presidential Decision Directives - NDD
What is the difference between Executive Orders and NSDDs?
Are NSDDS reviewed by the attorney general?
Are the published?
The Seizure
What administrative law device did the president use to seize the mills?
Who did the president tell to operate the mills?
Who is opposing the president's order?
Did they cooperate in operating the mills?
What would the president's recourse if they had not?
How did the district court rule on their injunction against the seizure?
Analyzing Divided Opinions
Do not look just at the bottom line of each opinion
Look at the individual issues the judges discuss
Are there some issues where the majority and the dissent agree?
Look at the assumptions the judges use
If you slightly change the assumptions, does the majority shift?
Might Frankfurter have ruled differently earlier in the war?
Justice Black
What sort of constitutional analyst was Black?
Is he sympathetic to implied powers?
What was he looking for to justify the president's action?
What about the Defense Production Act?
Why didn't Truman use it?
Did Black find authority?
Justice Frankfurter
What is the significance of the Labor Management Relations Act to Frankfurter?
Does it end the question in his mind?
Would he allow the president to use powers beyond on those in the Constitution if it were a long standing practice that was not specifically banned by Congress?
Does the Nature of the War Matter to Frankfurter?
Why is this seizure different from those in WW II?
Is this a disagreement with Black?
What is the danger of this analysis?
Under this theory, who has to change the law?
Justice Douglas
How does Douglas characterize the seizure?
What would the president have to do to make it legal?
Why can't he do this?
Why does he say this statement is an unavoidable part of separation of powers?
Justice Jackson Three Classes of Presidential Action
Acting pursuant to the direction of Congress
Acting where Congress was silent
Acting where Congress has disallowed the action
What does Jackson say determines the legality of the action in this case?
Judicial Deference (Chevron)?
What level of deference does Jackson say the court should give when the president is acting against the will of Congress?
How does this look like Black's analysis?
What does the Solicitor General claim is the legal authority?
Does this sound familiar?
What does Jackson think of this?
Congressional Power
Does Jackson believe that Congress could seize the mills?
What constitutional provision would he use?
How would Jackson limit the notion of Commander in Chief?
How does Jackson think the President is trying to use his power over foreign affairs to leverage his domestic powers?
What prophetic statement does Jackson make about Congress is a crisis?
Is this a realistic fear?
What examples have you seen since 9/11?
Justice Burton
Is Justice Burton comfortable with expansive presidential powers in an emergency?
Why does he not grant them in this case?
Did the subsequent effects of the strike support his view?
Should judges be deciding what is an emergency?
If not, what is the check on presidential power?
Is this an emergency?
Justice Clark
Is he sympathetic to "extra constitutional" powers?
What does he mean when quotes Lincoln: 
is it possible to lose the nation and yet preserve the constitution?
Is the reverse also possible?
Why does he reject the president's power here?
Do you think he was also affected by the belief that this was not really a crisis?
The Dissent - Vinson, Reed, and Minton
Does the dissent take a different view of the level of crisis?
Why?
The dissent points to the Price Stabilization Act that was in force at the time as limiting the president's power to grant price increases to allow the mills to pay the worker's more.
How do they say this allows him to act against the implicit direction of the Labor act to not use injunctions and seizures?
Why are they not worried about this leading to dictatorship?
What is the constraint they see on the president's actions?
Why is the Labor Relations Act this legislation?
Congressional Inaction
How can the president make law by "going first"?
What are the reasons for congressional inaction?
Do they all equally support president action?
What Constitutes Congressional Acquiescence?
Does it matter if Congress considers the matter after the president acts and still does not pass legislation?
What if they pass legislation on the topic and do not address the president's actions
What if this has been going on for a long time, since the early Congress?
Why does acquiescence by the early Congress matter more?
Does it matter if the president's action is Constitutional gloss, i.e., something that is not contemplated by the Constitution, as opposed to just something that Congress has not thought of?
What if it is forbidden by the Constitution?
Dames & Moore v. Regan, 453 US 654 (1981)
What was the Iranian hostage crisis?
What did President Carter have to agree to as a condition of the hostages being released?
What specific power does the International Emergency Economic Powers Act give the president that was used as part of the resolution of these claims.
Legal Authority
What did Carter do that the court found was not specifically authorized by any statute?
What legal authority did Congress give the president to resolve claims against foreign governments?
Did Congress review President Carter's actions?
Did Congress take any action to counter the President's actions?
Why does the court say this inaction is acquiescence?
How are claims against the states and federal government handled?
Is there any international law right to private claims against states?
Private Claims Affecting Foreign Policy
Should private claims be allowed against foreign governments?
How can these effect diplomacy?
What about prosecutions of heads of state?
The President's Emergency Powers Post Youngstown
What are examples of emergency powers that were used post 9/11?
Does Youngstown pose a real obstacle to presidential emergency powers?
Public Citizen v. DOJ (Advisory Committee Act and Judicial Appointments)
Kennedy separates the cases into those that involve a clear conflict with constitutional allocation of powers between the branches and those that do not.
He says there should be no compromise when the constitution clearly allocates a power to one branch, but there must be when the authority is ambiguous.
The pardons clause is an example of a power that is exclusively the presidents and would brook no interference from Congress.
Does the advisory committee act affect the president's appointment's power?
Kennedy thought it did and that it violated the Appointment's Clause
Does this give us any additional information about Youngstown?
Chapter 4 - The President’s National Security Powers
Learning Objectives
What is a delegation question?
Why does the court have different standards for delegation of foreign versus domestic powers.
What is the "sole organ" doctrine?
Should there be a different standard for foreign affairs than domestic governance, and why?
US v Curtis-Wright, 299 US 304 (1936)
What is the procedural posture of this case?
Check the full text if you are not sure
What are the defendants accused of?
Why do they want the congressional delegation of power declared unconstitutional?
This is 1936 - what other delegation doctrine cases are before the court?
How does Chadha affect the use of joint resolutions?
What can they be used for that has legal force?
Bolivia
What is the Monroe Doctrine?
Why did we care about Bolivia?
What is going on in Bolivia and how does the joint resolution address it?
Is this the only time were involved with Central and South America?
The Joint Resolution
Where do the underlying events take place, in or outside the US?
Does this court see this a foreign affairs issue?
Why is that critical?
Think of what else is going on with the delegation doctrine at this time
The Delegated Powers
What findings does the president have to do to make under the joint resolution?
What does he have to do with the findings to trigger the joint resolution?
What penalties does the law provide?
Why do the penalties have to come from Congress?
Why is an issue at Guantanamo?
The Presidential Declaration
      Now, therefore, I, Franklin D. Roosevelt, President of the United States of America, acting under and by virtue of the authority conferred in me by the said joint resolution of Congress, do hereby declare and proclaim that I have found that the prohibition of the sale of arms and munitions of war in the United States to those countries now engaged in armed conflict in the Chaco may contribute to the reestablishment of peace between those countries, and that I have consulted with the governments of other American Republics and have been assured of the cooperation of such governments as I have deemed necessary as contemplated by the said joint resolution; and I do hereby admonish all citizens of the United States and every person to abstain from every violation of the provisions of the Joint Resolution above set forth, hereby made applicable to Bolivia and Paraguay, and I do hereby warn them that all violations of such provisions will be rigorously prosecuted.
Constitutional Allocation of Powers
In this court's analysis, who held the domestic powers between the Declaration of Independence and the signing of the Constitution?
Who held the foreign powers during this period?
What does this mean for the transfer of powers in the Constitution?
The Senate Report of 1816
"The President is the constitutional representative of the United States with regard to foreign nations. He manages our concerns with foreign nations and must necessarily be most competent to determine when, how, and upon what subjects negotiation may be urged with the greatest prospect of success. For his conduct he is responsible to the Constitution. The committee consider this responsibility the surest pledge for the faithful discharge of his duty. They think the interference of the Senate in the direction of foreign negotiations calculated to diminish that responsibility and thereby to impair the best security for the national safety. 
Is this a Proper Delegation?
The Court's question:
In other words, assuming (but not deciding) that the challenged delegation, if it were confined to internal affairs, would be invalid, may it nevertheless be sustained on the ground that its exclusive aim is to afford a remedy for a hurtful condition within foreign territory?
The Sole Organ 
As Marshall said in his great argument of March 7, 1800, in the House of Representatives, ‘‘the President is the sole organ of the nation in its external relations, and its sole representative with foreign nations.’’
What are the possible meaning of this formulation?
Does the president get to make all the foreign policy?
Is he just the spokesman for the US?
The Congressional Role in Foreign Policy
How can Congress affect foreign policy?
Can it forbid specific actions?
Did this court think that congress should try to specifically direct the president on foreign affairs?
Why does the court find that this is not an improper delegation of authority case?
Is the Court's discussion of the history of foreign powers just dicta?
Stop for inauguration 
The Nature of Foreign and Domestic Powers
The Court presumes that there is a fundamental difference in the types of powers the president needs for foreign and domestic powers
Clearly military actions and threats are different
What about trade and commercial issues?
What about immigration and other human rights issues?
Are domestic problems really just domestic, or do most have international implications?
Are they really simpler than foreign problems?
The Prize Cases, 67 U.S. (2 Black) 635 (1863) - 67
What precipitated this case?
Why didn't the president go to Congress for a declaration of war?
What did the president order?
What is the plaintiff trying to get in this case?
The Legal Background
Where does the law of prize and capture come from?
Jus belli
What is the legal prerequisite to legally seizing ships at a blockade?
Is this a War?
Can the president declare war?
What war powers did the early congress give the president?
What was the president responding to?
Ratification
Did Congress authorize the action once they were back in session?
How does the majority treat this ratification?
Does the majority say that this authorization was necessary?
The Dissent
Assuming that it was necessary, what was the dissent's problem with a post action authorization?
Why does the majority reject this position?
Has this view prevailed?
What does the superfund laws tell us about this?
What did the dissent say was necessary before the president could take this as an emergency action?
How do the dissenters see this action in the absence of a declaration of war?
Note 1 - The Mexican War
Fleming v Page - 1851
President orders seizure of a Mexican port
Does this make it US territory?
What is the president's legal role in directing the seizure?
Military commander or policy maker?
Does the president's seizure of the port make it US territory?
Remember the Halls of Montezuma in the Marine Hymn?
Note 2 - Repealing Invasions
Martin v. Mott - 1813
Congress passes a law saying the president can repel invasions and deal with insurrections.
What does the Court say about who gets to decide if there is an invasion?
Is this decision reviewable in court?
Is this classic agency deference?
Presidential Uses of Military Power - p 72
1. Actions for which congressional authorization was claimed 7
2. Naval self-defense 1
3. Enforcement of law against piracy, no trespass 1
4. Enforcement of law against piracy, technical trespass 7
5. Landings to protect citizens before 1862 13
6. Landings to protect citizens, 1865-1967 56
7. Invasion of foreign or disputed territory, no combat 10
8. Invasion of foreign or disputed territory, combat 10
9. Reprisals against aborigines 9
Continued
10. Other reprisals not authorized by statute 4
11. Minatory demonstrations without combat 6
12. Intervention in Panama 1
13. Protracted occupation of Caribbean states 6
14. Actions anticipating World War II
15. Bombing of Laos 1
16. Korean and Vietnamese Wars 2
17. Miscellaneous 2
How does this ratify Napoleon's assertion that, "Authority belongs to he who uses it?"
Can Congress limit the president's power to carry out war?
Little v. Barreme, 6 U.S. (2 Cranch) 170 (1804) - p 77
Who is the defendant?
What did he do?
What did the statute provide?
Was this ship bound for France?
Why did the captain think he could seize a ship headed from a French port?
The Legal Issues
What legal theory did the ship's owners use to sue the Captain?
Does the court decide whether, had there not been a law, would this have been within the president's powers?
What is the effect of the law in this courts' view?
What is the impact on the captain of the court's decision?
Who would have to pay the damages today?
What was different in that period?
Note 3 - Does it Matter if the War is Undeclared?
What have some scholars argued substitutes for a formal declaration of war in the post-WW II conflicts?
Does it matter for international law whether the constitutional niceties are followed if we make it clear when we are at war and with who?
9/11 and War
What did the president say about war with al Quada?
Why is this legally significant?
How is this war different from recent wars?
What have been the effects on domestic policy?
What does it mean to a prisoner of this sort of war?
The President’s Emergency Powers
In re Neagle, 135 U.S. 1 (1890)
What happened and what is the court reviewing?
Did Congress forbid this action?
How does the court justify this with section 2, article 3, the "take care" clause?
Could a sheriff in CA do this under CA law?
Why is this relevant to the federal case?
Is there a Statutory Alternative to an Emergency Action?
What could the feds have done to protect the justice that would not have lead to this controversy?
Is this domestic or foreign?
What happened in the case of Kostza?
Why does it matter where Kostza was grabbed?
Why does the dissent reject the use of the "take care clause"?
Note 3 - The Pullman strike
What where Pullman cars?
What were Pullman porters?
Why would their strike affect the mails?
How was the legal basis for the president's injunction to stop the strike different from that in Youngstown?
Note 4 - The Emancipation Proclamation
Where did this free the slaves?
Why does this matter?
What would be the legal problem if he freed the slaves in the North?
What did free the slaves in the North?
Why did it need to be an amendment?
Are Presidential Emergency Powers Implicit?
What does this mean: 
Rulers come and go; governments end and forms of government change; but sovereignty survives. A political society cannot endure without a supreme will somewhere. Sovereignty is never held in suspense.
Home Building & Loan Assn. v. Blaisdell, 290 U.S. 398, 425-426 (1934)
Emergency does not create power. Emergency does not increase granted power or remove or diminish the restrictions imposed upon power granted or reserved. The Constitution was adopted in a period of grave emergency. Its grants of power to the Federal Government and its limitations of the powers of the States were determined in the light of emergency and they were not altered by emergency. What power was thus granted and what limitations were thus imposed are questions which have always been, and always will be, the subject of close examination under our constitutional system.
What emergency was this case looking at?
Saving the Union
Compare and contrast with Lincoln's question of whether we can save the Constitution but lose the nation.
What does it mean to say that the president has the power, but not the legal authority, to act in domestic emergencies?
What can happen if he does acts unconstitutionally?
Can congress limit these emergency powers?
Does it matter where they are trying to limit them domestically or for foreign actions?
Is this better than having congress give him unlimited emergency powers?
Keeping Secrets
Quick review - who does the corporate/Whitehouse counsel represent?
Why does this matter?
What did the court find in Hilary's case?
Is there a constitutional right to public access for governmental information?
What does this tell us about the legal basis for the president to withhold information from the public?
FOIA Review
What is the statutory basis for public access to governmental information?
What does it provide for information about national security?
Does the government even have to tell the court whether it has the documents that are sought in a request for information?
Do these apply to Congressional investigations?
What would limit congress?
Where does separation of powers come in?
What is the different between the communications privilege and the deliberative process privilege?
Which one is really based on separation of powers rather than traditional common law privileges?
Executive Privilege
Nixon v. US
What if the president had destroyed the tapes before anyone had asked for them?
Why can't he do it after the grand jury subpoena?
How did Nixon justify not releasing the tapes?
Did Cox find clear evidence for a historical presidential privilege?
Did they make Nixon surrender the tapes?
Would it have mattered if this had been a congressional subpoena, rather than a grand jury subpoena?
Chapter 5 - Congressional National Security Powers
How was the country different in 1800 from today as regards the relative power of congress versus the president to wage war?
What resources did the president have available then and now?
How does this affect the basic shift of powers?
Would the Iraq war have played out differently if congress had to appropriate money to raise an army, then declare war?
Why would appropriating the money really matter?
Declaration of War
Procedurally, how does congress declare war?
Is the presentment clause involved?
Can the president veto a declaration of war?
What if the president disagrees - can he refuse to fight the war?
Bas v. Ting, 4 US 37 (1800)
What are the facts?
What did the lower court award Captain Tingy?
What did the 1799 law require ship owners to pay if a ship was recaptured?
Why the variable scale?
What was necessary to trigger the 1799 law?
Was there a War?
What is a solemn or perfect war?
Was there a declaration of war with France?
Were we at peace with France?
What war-like actions did we take?
Evidence of a State of War
1st. To resist the search of a French public vessel: 
2d. To capture any vessel that should attempt, by force, to compel submission to a search: 
3d. To re-capture any American vessel seized by a French vessel: and
4th. To capture any French armed vessel wherever found on the high seas.
Imperfect War
What is an imperfect war?
How do you know you are in an imperfect war?
Does an imperfect war create a legal enemy?
Does this trigger the 1799 act?
Does the Captain get to keep his 1/2?
Contingent Authority
Why would congress give the president contingent authority?
How was contingent authority triggered in the trading with Bolivia case?
How is contingent authority triggered after a domestic disaster such as a flood?
What is the complication with deciding when war powers contingent authority is triggered?
The Legal Domino Effects of War
Example 1
Alien Enemy Act, 50 U.S.C.
§21 (2000), ‘‘whenever there is a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government,’’ citizens of ‘‘the hostile nation or government’ ’who are at least 14 years old and not naturalized are subject to summary arrest, internment, and deportation when the President so proclaims.
How would this work in the war on terrorism?
The Legal Domino Effects of War
Example 2
Trading With the Enemy Act, 50 U.S.C. App. §§1-44 (2000)
enables the President to regulate or prohibit commerce with an enemy state or its citizens after ‘‘Congress has declared war or the existence of a state of war.’’ And the President may authorize electronic surveillance, physical searches, and the use of pen registers and trap and trace devices to acquire foreign intelligence without a court order for up to 15 days ‘‘following a declaration of war by Congress.’’
The Authorization of Force after 9/11
...use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations, or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons. [Pub. L. No. 107-40, §2(a), 115 Stat. 224 (2001).]
What is the effect of this Authorization?
Did Congress declare war on al Quada?
Can congress declare a war on an enterprise, rather than a country?
How does the war on terror differ from previous declarations of war?
Should such a declaration trigger the usual war measures, including international law issues?
What is the vagueness problem for foreign countries and their citizens?
Brown v. US, 12 US 110 (1814)
Did the declaration of war allow the president to seize British property held in the US (trees)?
Is seizing property and land recognized as part of the traditional war powers recognized by the law of nations at that time?
The UN has changed all this
What if the forest was seized as a strategic objective during a battle?
How is holding it different from keeping it?
When is the War Over?
Is there a constitutional provision for ending a declared war?
If it is by treaty, what is the role of Congress?
What if the president just quits fighting the war?
When would the contingent authority and international law dominos revert to a pre-war state?
Did we sign a peace treaty in Viet Nam?
Lichter v. US, 334 US 742 (1948)
What was the purpose of the Renegotiation Act?
What constitutional clause authorized it?
How is the Renegotiation act like the selective service act?
What is the selective service?
Got your draft card?
What advantages do the merchants have over the draftees?
Legal Issues
What was the delegation theory attack on the law?
What is the takings argument on excess profits?
How is the modified by the "raise armies" and "take care clauses"?
What did Justice Hughes tell us in his address, ‘‘War Powers Under The Constitution,  about construing the Constitution in the face of conflicts?
How did the court rule?
Is the argument different for state laws, where there is no US Constitutional provisions that modify the takings clause?
What about modern price gouging laws?
Greene v. McElroy 360 US 474 (1959) - 105
What happened to plaintiff?
What are the new property cases?
Is this a new property case?
What is the due process problem?
Legal Issues
What is plaintiff's claim that there is no authority for this action?
Is the procedure specified in a statute?
Why does congressional ratification based on funding the procurements fail?
What is the court dodging?
Would plaintiff's firing without due process be constitutional if it was authorized?
The Scope of Congressional War Powers
...control the price of every commodity bought and sold within the national boundaries; to fix the amount of rent to be charged for every room, home, or building and this even though to an individual landlord there may be less than a fair return; to construct extensive systems of public works; to operate railroads; to prohibit the sale of liquor; to restrict freedom of speech in a manner that would be unwarranted in time of peace; to ration and allocate the distribution of every commodity important to the war effort; to restrict the personal freedom of American citizens by curfew orders and the designation of areas of exclusion; and, finally, to demand of every citizen that he serve in the armed forces of the nation.
Spaulding v. Douglas Aircraft Co., 154 F.2d 419, 422-423 (9th Cir. 1946)
Making Sense of Delegation Cases
The authors of the text raise many theoretical questions about the extent of Congressional power to delegate war powers to the president.
This is wishful thinking, the court has not upheld a constitutional challenge on delegation grounds since 1936.
The standard now is whether Congress has given enough direction so that the court can review the president's or the agency's actions.
If not, the court will find that the delegation fails to transfer the power, not that it is unconstitutional.
Appropriations as Evidence of Authorization for Executive Actions
How do you argue that an appropriation bill is also an authorization bill for specific executive powers?
Why does the modern budget process undermine this assumption?
What do you look to in the appropriations bill to support an authorization argument?
Impoundment - what if the president disagrees with an action of congress and just refuses to spend the money?
What has the United States Supreme Court said about impoundments?
Congressional Limits through Appropriations
Spaulding v. Douglas Aircraft (1945)
Congress in making appropriations has the power and authority not only to designate the purpose of the appropriation, but also the terms and conditions under which the executive department . . . may expend such appropriations. . . . 
The purpose of appropriations, the terms and conditions under which said appropriations were made, is a matter solely in the hands of Congress and it is the plain and explicit duty of the executive branch . . . to comply with the same.
Given Chevron, why are limits on appropriations more effective than direct legislation on agency authority?
Proclamation No. 7463, Declaration of National Emergency by Reason of Certain Terrorist Attacks 66 Fed. Reg. 48,199 (Sept. 14, 2001)
What is the legal purpose of this declaration?
What ends a state of national emergency?
What was the Feed and Forage Act of 1861 intended to authorize?
How did Nixon use the Feed and Forage Act of 1861?
When was the national emergency he relied on for contingent authority declared?
What does the National Emergencies Act require?
What does a formal declaration allow Congress to do?
Emergency Powers Laws
There are hundreds of emergency statutes that broaden the president's powers.
Why does Congress apply different standards in these laws?
Why does this make presidential flexibility in declaring an emergency more problematic?
Is it better for Congress to give the President broad powers in an emergency or to let the presidents use his intrinsic powers?
How does a statute change subsequent review?
Can it embolden the president?
State Emergency Powers Laws
States, including LA, give governors the power to declare emergencies and to suspend many state laws and regulations during these emergencies.
How can this be a problem?
Why do governors like to declare emergencies?
Can emergency laws give agencies expertise they did not have before the emergency?
Supplies?
Personnel?
Takings in National Security Emergencies
What about regulatory takings, i.e., when someone cannot get paid or complete a business deal because of changes in policy in dealing with a foreign country?
Is this the same as if the government actually took the property for direct use?
Would Truman have had to pay for the costs related to the steel seizure if the court had found that he had the authority for the seizure?
Would the result be different for the seizure of property which is then used by the government?
Stopped here
Investigatory Powers
McGrain v Daugherty, 273 US 135 (1927)
Does the constitution specifically give Congress the power to investigate and force witnesses to testify?
Has congress done this for a long time?
Why does it matter that it has been going on since the beginning?
Who does the enforcement for subpoenas?
Why is this a special problem with executive branch witnesses?
Getting Information from the Executive
What is a resolution of inquiry?
Who are they directed at?
What is the compliance problem?
Why was the appeals court in the American Telephone & Telegraph case reluctant to order the executive branch to comply?
Would this be a political question?
Why was enforcement simpler in Nixon v. US?
Sharing information with Congress
What if some congressional district in California elects a communist?
What about sharing information with state and local government officials?
Would you trust the governor?
Illinois example?
Louisiana example?
More later
LIMITATIONS ON CONGRESSIONAL WAR POWERS
Lovett v. US, 328 US 303 (1946)
What did congress use a rider in the spending bill to do?
What due process does this deny them?
Why is this a bill of attainder?
What is the general principle?
Can you use appropriations to accomplish things that Congress does not have the power to do directly?
What about the federal ban on paying for abortions?
How would such a ban be distinguished from this case?
May Congress use Appropriations to Control Foreign Policy?
What is the problem in enforcing this?
What if congress just shuts down the state department?
Why do the use of omnibus bills make it difficult to fight about specific appropriations riders?
If congress is prohibited from using appropriations to mess with foreign policy, does it follow that the president may divert money from other appropriations to accomplish foreign policy purposes?
Reallocation of Appropriations
What are the constitutional questions posed by the president reallocating appropriated money to different uses?
How can this be stopped in specific cases?
What recourse does Congress have to punish the president?
Is this likely?
Other Legislative Controls
durational limits on authorizations (‘‘sunset’’ provisions), 
joint resolutions of approval or disapproval (requiring presentment, unlike concurrent resolutions), and 
report-and-wait rules that require reporting to Congress for some specified period before executive action becomes legally effective.
What if the president ignores the joint resolution or the reporting requirement?
Line Item Veto 
What is a line item veto?
Why would congress give this to the president?
What is the constitutional problem with a line item veto?
Why did the founder's not think about a line item veto
What did they anticipate about spending bills?
What do does an OBRA spending bill look like?
Does Congress have a way to give the president flexibility?
What problems would this cause with secret budgets for the CIA and NSA?
Chapter 6 - The role of the Judiciary
Part I
The First Gulf War
Dellums v. Bush, 752 F. Supp. 1141 (1990)
What precipitated the US actions?
Why do we care about Kuwait?
How does the president's cooperation with Congress and allies differ from that in the Second Gulf War?
Were we on our own in the First Gulf War?
How did the First Gulf War end?
Saudi Arabia
What is the strategic importance of Saudi Arabia?
Is Saudi Arabia our ally?
Do they like us to have troops in their country?
Why?
Are they a moderate Muslin country that seeks to calm Islamic extremist groups?
Status of the Troops
What had the president done at the time this suit was brought?
Just as a comparison with the second Gulf War, how many troops were on the ground in Saudi Arabia?
What was the president and Cheney's stated intent at the time the suit was filed?
What role did Cheney have then?
What role did he have in the Second Gulf War?
Any other familiar faces in the Bush I White House?
The Plaintiffs
Who is bringing this action?
What does the plaintiff want to get?
What do they want the president to do before acting?
Do you think all members of congress support this action?
What congressional power do they claim the president is invading?
The Political Question
What is the president's broad political question defense?
What did Baker v. Carr tell us about political questions?
Why doesn't the court buy this?
What about the claim that the court cannot decide if there is a war going on?
Mitchell v. Laird, 488 F.2d 611, 614 (D.C. Cir. 1973)
What war was this?
How did the court characterize the question of whether there was a war going on?
What makes a war under the Mitchell standard?
What did Mitchell say was the remedy if the Vietnam was an illegal war?
Standing
How are the plaintiffs claiming they are injured?
What does Mitchell v. Laird, 488 F.2d 611, 614 (D.C. Cir. 1973) tell us about their standing?
Remedial 
Has Congress passed a law or resolution barring the incursion into Iraq?
What controls does Congress have?
Why can't plaintiff's get Congress to use these powers?
Do you think the judge is right that they should be able to go forward just because they cannot get Congress to use its remedial powers?
Is the president hiding the troop buildup from them?
Has the president adjourned Congress to prevent the vote?
Ripeness
What could congress do to moot this?
What could the president do?
How does this affect ripeness?
What would be the impact of the injunction if issued at this point?
End Result?
What is the court's holding?
Do you think the United States Supreme Court would ever really decide this type of case?
Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 217 (1962)
Prominent on the surface of any case held to involve a political question is found a textually demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue to a coordinate political department; or 
a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving it; or the impossibility of deciding without an initial policy determination of a kind clearly for non-judicial discretion; or 
the impossibility of a court’s undertaking independent resolution without expressing lack of respect due coordinate branches of government; or an unusual need for unquestioning adherence to a political decision already made; or 
the potentiality of embarrassment from multifarious pronouncements by various departments on one question. 
Ange v. Bush, 752 F Supp 509 (1990)
What was plaintiff's claim in this case?
What would be the effect on the military if plaintiff prevails?
Why does plaintiff have the same standing problems as Congress?
Will it make any difference to his or Congress' standing once the order to invade is given?
How does Judge Lambert argue that this is a classic political question?
The Problem of Standards for War Powers Cases
Does the constitution clearly prevent the president from using troops to invade other countries?
Has the president done this without a declaration of war since the beginning?
What standard could a court use to decide that a military action is illegal?
Why does being against a law passed by Congress not solve the problem?
What does Judicial Abstention Mean to Separation of Powers?
Who "wins" when the court invokes political question abstention in a war powers case?
Does this shift the balance of powers between the branches of the government?
Is this better than the separation of powers problem posed if the court intervened in a war powers case?
Are the courts right to stay out of war powers cases?
Gilligan v. Morgan, 413 U.S. 1, 6 (1973)
The Kent State Shootings
Who shot whom?
Who did the shooters work for?
What did the lawsuit seek?
What was the separation of powers issue for the court?
The Courts Ruling
Which branch did  the court think should be investigating the Guard?
What provision of the constitution did the court base its ruling on?
What outcome was the court avoiding, i.e., what happens if the troopers had been properly ordered to shoot the students?
What about criminal prosecutions under state law?
What would the state have to show for a successful prosecution of the individuals?
What would be necessary to beat a "following orders" defense?
What are the political chances for such a prosecution?
Who was indicted?
In Goldwater v. Carter, 617 F.2d 697 (D.C. Cir. 1979) (en banc), rev’d, 444 U.S. 996 (1979)
How are treaties ratified?
Are the legally effective before they are ratified?
How does the constitution specify that treaties are revoked?
What did Carter propose to do?
What was Goldwater's claim?
Dellums turned on the things congress could still do
Is this case different?
Standing - Northeastern Florida v. Jacksonville, 508 U.S. 656, 663-664 (1993)
What is injury in fact?
Concrete?
Actual, not imminent?
Causal relationship?
Redressability? 
Why does a denial of standing not tell us anything about the underlying merits of the case?
Can there be wrongs where no one has standing to sue to correct them?
Zone of Interest?
What is the zone of interest?
Does the plaintiff have to be the one injured?
Qui tam actions?
What can congress modify by statute?
What factors cannot be modified?
Are these the same in the state courts?
Can Congress Change the Court's Behavior?
Why can’t Congress force the court to resolve political question cases?
Can Congress take away the court's jurisdiction over national security cases?
If abstention is the problem, would it matter?
Are there constitutional limits on this?
What are the political limits?
More in the detainee cases
Citizen Standing
Pietsch v. Bush, 755 F. Supp. 62 (E.D.N.Y. 1991)
What was plaintiff's claimed injury in fact?
What did the court say about this?
What about his claim that any citizen should be able to sue to require the government to obey the constitution?
Schlesinger v. Reservists Committee to Stop the War, 418 U.S. 208 (1974)
Why did the plaintiff claim that it was unconstitutional for Congressmen to be National Guard Officers?
What constitutional provision does this violate?
What is the separation of powers problem?
The Ruling
‘‘standing to sue may not be predicated upon an interest of the kind alleged here which is held in common by all members of the public, because of the necessarily abstract nature of the injury all citizens share.’’
Why?
Putting aside the court's ruling, do the plaintiffs have a valid constitutional argument?
What was the problem with their standing?
Could congress do if it wanted to fix this?
Flast v. Cohen, 392 U.S. 83 (1968)
Why does it matter which constitutional provision is being violated?
What is the two part test?
What is the link to the taxpayer?
What is the violation?
Do you think a tax payer can assert that a war is illegal?
Can a tax payer get standing if he complains that he does not want his tax money spent on an illegal war?
Raines v. Bird, 521 U.S. 811, 829 (1997)
What did the plaintiff congressmen want the court to rule?
What was their standing problem?
If congress really though this was unconstitutional, what could it do?
What did the court eventually rule about the line item veto?
Campbell v. Clinton, 52 F. Supp. 2d 34 (D.D.C. 1999), aff’d, 203 F.3d 19 (D.C. Cir. 2000)
(Bombing Yugoslavia)
What were the congressmen arguing?
What does it mean to say that "there were congressional votes defeating a declaration of war (427-2), defeating an authorization of the air strikes (213-213), defeating a resolution ordering an immediate end to U.S. participation in the NATO operation (290-139)
What is the legal status of a bill that does not pass?
What did Congress vote for?
Why does one appropriations bill trump a thousand failed bills?
Would it even trump a successful join resolution telling the president to get out of Yugoslavia?
What can congress do if it does not like a war the president is in?
What can congress do if the president orders in troops in violation of provisions of the appropriations bill supporting the troops?
Did Congress do any of this?
Should that defeat standing?
Congressional Standing
When does Tribe think congressman should have standing?
What does it mean that a presidential action nullified a congressional vote?
What recourse does Congress always have?
Why does Scalia think that congressmen should never have standing in their official capacity?
Doe v. Bush, 323 F.3d 133 (1st Cir. 2003)
Why did plaintiffs say that it was illegal for Bush II to invade Iraq?
What is wrong with the claim that congress colluded with the president?
Why isn't there a real conflict between Congress and the President?
What did Hillary say to explain her vote?
Do you think the court would have reached a different result if they had waited a few days and the war had started?
In general, why is the role of the courts so limited as regards illegal wars and fights in congress over war powers?
Chapter 7 - The Domestic Effect of International Law
What Makes a Treaty?
(1) the states intend the agreement to be legally binding under international law; 
(2) the agreement deals with significant matters; 
(3) it clearly describes the obligations of the parties; and 
(4) it takes a form consistent with the intent that it be legally binding.
Enforcing Treaties
What is the international law significance of a treaty?
What happens if a country does not honor a treaty?
How are international trade rules enforced?
Is there an international law enforcement system for other treaties?
What mechanisms can be used, short of war, for multilateral treaties such as the those deal with atomic energy?
What is going on with Iran in this regard?
Senate Ratification
What is the legal effect of ratification?
What does advice and consent mean?
Was the senate meant to participate in drafting treaties?
What is the downside to senate participation?
What if the senate will not ratify without changes?
Does this undermine the president's constitutional right to negotiate treaties?
Fast track - the Senate promises to not mess with the treaty, only to vote it up or down.
How do we decide that a treaty means?
What did the president want to use to justify reinterpreting the ABM treaty?
What is Biden's complaint?
How is amending a treaty different from terminating it?
Relevance of Senate Ratification History to Treaty Interpretation (April 9, 1987) - 159
What is Biden addressing in this report?
If these deliberations were intended to be a binding part of the treaty, what could the Senate do to make them binding?
Whose representations should count in construing a treaty?
What can the senators do if they believe that a provision in the treaty is ambiguous?
What does this report say should happen if the president wants to use secret side deals to change the meaning of the treaty?
The President's Role
What are the president's dual roles in treaties?
Why is president's role more important in international law?
What type of legal document does this report say a treaty is?
What is the primary responsibility of the executive or the courts in construing the treaty?
What is the best evidence of the meaning of the treaty?
Abrogating Treaties - Goldwater v. Carter, 617 F.2d 697 (1979)
Vacated by United States Supreme Court as non-justiciable
What happens if conditions change, say an ally goes communist?
Who evaluates these changes?
Why not go to the senate to get the treaty modified?
When do modifications amount to abrogating the treaty?
Who has final authority to send in troops when there is a mutual defense treaty?
Executive and Other Agreements
Turns out that we sign very few treaties, preferring to do everything with executive agreements
Types of Executive agreements
Congressional-executive agreements
Congress either approves them or delegates approval to the president
Agreements made pursuant to treaty
Probably implicitly authorized by the treaty
Pure executive agreements, such as the Iran hostage settlement
Made in USA Foundation v. US, 242 F3d 1300 (2000) - 172
This is a fight over what can be the subject of a treaty versus an executive agreement
Does the constitution give any guidance?
Was the court able to find any bright line?
Note 6 - 172 - Case-Zablocki Act: Congressional limits on agreements
What does the Case-Zablocki Act require?
What if the president does not comply?
Does that make the agreements void?
Has congress successfully limited the president's ability to make secret deals?
Review of congressional limits
Does making an agreement give the president the power to carry it out if congress disagrees?
What can he do without congressional support?
Do Treaties supersede the Constitution? - Reid v. Covert, 354 US 1 (1957)
What are the facts?
Where did the crimes take place?
Why are they being tried by military courts?
Is the defendant active duty military?
What constitutional provision do the defendants say was violated?
We will see this issue in the detainee cases
The Treaty
What does the treaty provide?
May treaties override the constitution?
What did the court say about a subsequent statute overriding a treaty?
Must the statute obey the constitution?
What did the court decide about trying these women in military courts?
Why can soldiers be tried in military courts?
Committee of US Citizens living in Nicaragua v. Reagan, 859 F2d 929 (1988)
What did the International Court of Justice find?
What did the US do to avoid this judgment?
What did Congress do in violation of the judgment?
What are the plaintiffs seeking?
What is the Domestic Effect of International Law?
The first issue is whether Congress may override a treaty by statute
Since this is a subsequent statute, it overrides.
What about its violation of international law?  
Can the US escape the consequences of violating a treaty by abrogating the treaty?
Head Money Cases, 112 U.S. 580 (1884)
What do treaties depend on for enforcement?
As the Supreme Court said in the Head Money Cases, a treaty ‘‘depends for the enforcement of its provisions on the interest and honor of the governments which are parties to it. If these fail, its infraction becomes the subject of international negotiations and reclamations . . . [but] with all this the judicial courts have nothing to do and can give no redress.’’
Does International Law Count?
Who can be a party in the International court of Justice?
Does this create individual standing in US courts?
Self-Executing Treaties
What is a self-executing treaty?
What are limits on self-executing treaties?
What happens when the president abrogates a self-executing treaty?
Treaties that Require Congressional Action
Many treaties are really agreements that congress pass laws to accomplish a certain goal.
Abrogating the treaty does not repeal these laws
What do you have to do to abrogate the effect of these treaties?
United States v. Pink, 315 U.S. 203, 230 (1942)
the Supreme Court declared that a treaty is the law of the land, and that ‘‘international compacts and agreements . . . have a similar dignity.’’ While the case law suggests that congressional-executive agreements and agreements made pursuant to treaties have the same legal effect as constitutional treaties, it is unclear about the effect of sole executive agreements on prior statutory or treaty law.
What does this mean?
The Domestic Legal Effect of Customary International Law and Jus Cogens
Remember, this is about the domestic enforcement of customary international law and jus cogens
Can a plaintiff get a US court to issue an order enforcing these agreements, absent any authorization in the form of a statute, i.e., if they have not been executed by Congress?
There may very effect international enforcement and still no domestic enforcement
Committee of US Citizens living in Nicaragua v. Reagan, 859 F2d 929 (1988)
Continued
The Paquete Habana, 175 U.S. 677 (1900)
In what war did this case arise?
What type of vessels were seized?
What did the owners cite as law prohibiting the seizures?
Did the court find any contrary law?
What did it rule?
‘‘international law is part of our law, and must be ascertained and administered by the courts of justice of appropriate jurisdiction.’’
Justice Gray's Limitation
What did Justice Gray say limits this finding?
While the courts have not directly considered subsequent statutes overruling international law norms, what have they considered that is analogous?
‘‘since violation of a treaty is essentially a violation of the principle of customary international law requiring that treaties be observed.’’
Nuremberg
Jus Cogens
What is jus cogens?
How is it established?
What does this mean:
‘‘A treaty is void if, at the time of its conclusion, it conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international law . . . [which] is a norm accepted by the international community of States as a whole as a norm from which no derogation is permitted. . . .’’
How does jus cogens transcend the consent of states?
ICJ Judgments and Customary International Law
‘‘Customary international law results from a general and consistent practice of states followed by them from a sense of legal obligation.’’ Restatement (Third) of Foreign Relations Law §102(2) (1987)
Finally, in order for such a customary norm of international law to become a peremptory norm, there must be a further recognition by ‘‘the international community . . . as a whole [that this is] a norm from which no derogation is permitted.’’
Why do ICJ Judgments fail this test?
Do all nations accept them?
What are Universal Norms?
The recently revised Restatement acknowledges two categories of such norms: 
‘‘the principles of the United Nations Charter prohibiting the use of force,’’ and 
fundamental human rights law that prohibits genocide, slavery, murder, torture, prolonged arbitrary detention, and racial discrimination. 
Possible Effect of Jus Cogens
Such basic norms of international law as the proscription against murder and slavery may well have the domestic legal effect that appellants suggest. That is, they may well restrain our government in the same way that the Constitution restrains it.
Filartiga v. Pena-Irala, 630 F.2d 876 (2d Cir. 1980)
One citizen of Paraguay sued another for torture done while he was a police chief.
Both were in the US, and jurisdiction was through the Alien Tort Claims Act, which we will study later.
The court found that official torture violated jus cogens and was a valid claim under the ATCA
See why the Republicans were so nervous about Holder saying water boarding is torture?
Fifth Amendment Claims
What is the basis for the 5th amendment claim?
Why does the court say that the key is that they must prove that the actions of the US were arbitrary?
Is Rejecting the ICJ Arbitrary?
(1) Nicaragua had not itself consented to, and therefore could not invoke, ICJ jurisdiction; 
(2) the dispute with Nicaragua was one involving ‘‘armed conflict,’’ collective self-defense and preservation of regional stability, and thus fell outside the ICJ’s jurisdiction as set forth in the U.N. Charter and in the ICJ’s own precedents; and 
(3) the United States itself had never consented to jurisdiction over this type of conflict since, by reservation, it had expressly excluded ‘‘disputes arising under multilateral treaty’’ from the scope of its consent.
Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain, 542 U.S. 692 (2004)
What are the facts?
What is the Federal Tort Claims Act and what does it provide?
Why does his claim fail under the FTCA?
Would it still fail under the FTCA if he was in the US?
What claim would you use in the US?
History of the Alien Tort Statute
What claims were the Framers familiar with?
Blackstone’s three primary offenses: 
violation of safe conducts, 
infringement of the rights of ambassadors, and 
piracy.
When the original Alien Tort Statute (ATS) was passed, who did congress envision using it?
Were there many cases before Filartiga?
§ 1350. Alien's action for tort
"The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States." [this is the whole law]
Does this spell out what a violation is?
Justice Souter and Federal Common Law
Does Souter think common law is found or made by judges?
How does Eire limit the role of the federal courts in developing common law?
Has Congress passed any laws that would provide a basis to assume that it wants the courts to create law expanding foreign rights under the ATS?
Does he close the door, as Scalia does?
It would take some explaining to say now that federal courts must avert their gaze entirely from any international norm intended to protect individuals.
Texas Industries, Inc. v. Radcliff Materials, Inc., 451 U.S. 630, 641 (1981)
...recognizing that ‘‘international disputes implicating . . . our relations with foreign nations’’ are one of the ‘‘narrow areas’’ in which ‘‘federal common law’’ continues to exist.
Why is international law a more appropriate area for federal common law than domestic cases?
What did Congress do after the courts found jurisdiction in Filartiga v. Pena-Irala, 630 F.2d 876 (C.A.2 1980)?
Why does Souter say this is important?
Does Snatching Alvarez Violate Long Accepted Norms?
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Declaration), G.A. Res. 217A (III), U.N. Doc. A/810 (1948).
Does this declaration create any domestic legal rights?
What was the US reservation when ratifying the treaty?
Has Congress executed the treaty with legislation?
Implications of Arbitrary Arrest as a Violation of International Norms
His rule would support a cause of action in federal court for any arrest, anywhere in the world, unauthorized by the law of the jurisdiction in which it took place, and would create a cause of action for any seizure of an alien in violation of the Fourth Amendment, supplanting the actions under Rev. Stat. §1979, 42 U.S.C. §1983 and Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), that now provide damages remedies for such violations. . . .
Souter's Holding
It is enough to hold that a single illegal detention of less than a day, followed by the transfer of custody to lawful authorities and a prompt arraignment, violates no norm of customary international law so well defined as to support the creation of a federal remedy.
Scalia's View
The question is not what case or congressional action prevents federal courts from applying the law of nations as part of the general common law; it is what authorizes that peculiar exception from Erie’s fundamental holding that a general common law does not exist. . . .
American law—the law made by the people’s democratically elected representatives— does not recognize a category of activity that is so universally disapproved by other nations that it is automatically unlawful here, and automatically gives rise to a private action for money damages in federal court.
Customary International Law
What is customary international law?
Is there a generally agreed to codification?
What is the chief argument for executive power to override customary international law?
Who overrode customary international law in Ferrer- Mazorra v. Meese, 479 U.S. 889 (1986)?
Did the court indicate that any executive branch official could do this?
Can Congress ban the United States Supreme Court from considering customary international law as a precedent in US law cases?
The Use of International Law as a
Guide to Interpretation of the United States Constitution
‘‘The use of international law is even more compelling than most interpretive methods because it is not the subjective decision of a single judge, but a product of years of distillation of principles formed through international consensus."
What are the weaknesses of this argument?
What are the disadvantages of Scalia's position?
Chapter 8 - General War
Vietnam War
Introduction to the Vietnam War - read this for the history
What are other conflicts with roots in colonial empires?
What would winning have meant?
Vietnam is now communist - does that matter?
Why don't we worry about communists any more?
Key points
Once the dominos were safe, Vietnam was only a proxy for the US/Communist Block conflict
The same conflicts played out in the mideast
Johnson and Nixon lied about the conduct of the war
How did this change the relationship between the Congress and the President?
Vietnam was the first modern media war
Lying to the media became dangerous
How have we managed the media in the Iraq wars?
The Tokin Gulf Resolution
How is the Tokin Gulf incident like WMDs in the Iraq war?
Is the Tokin Gulf Resolution a declaration of war?
Is it anything at all, legally?
If not, what does that tell us about presidential power?
Why didn't it matter when Congress repealed the Tokin Gulf Amendment?
What did Congress keep doing?
Orlando v. Laird United States Court of Appeals,  443 F.2d 1039, cert. denied, 404 U.S. 869 (1971)
Who are plaintiffs?
What is their claim?
Why do they have standing when other citizens do not?
What is the ‘‘mutual participation’’ standard for prosecution of the war?
What is plaintiff's theory on why Congress was not free to reject the war?
Why is resolving this a political question?
Pentagon Papers
What were the Pentagon Papers?
What was their political significance?
They are discussed more fully in Chapter 37
Their publication and the attempts to stop it were a major national drama
Holtzman v. Schlesinger, 484 F.2d 1307 (1973)?
What did the district court order that was being appealed?
Sec. 108. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, on or after August 15, 1973, no funds herein or heretofore appropriated may be obligated or expended to finance directly or indirectly combat activities by United States military forces in or over or from off the shores of North Vietnam, South Vietnam, Laos or Cambodia. and not a judicial question. . . ."
How does this show congressional support for the bombing at issue in this case? (Was it before 15 Aug?)
Chapter 9 - War Powers Resolution
The War Powers Resolution
Parse each provision of the War Powers Resolution - figure out what each part means and be prepared to explain it.
What is the purpose of the Resolution?
What is Congress claiming about its right to control presidential powers?
When can the president use troops?
What is the ambiguity in #3?
Consultation with Congress
What does Congress want consultation to mean?
What do presidents think it means?
Reporting
What triggers reporting?
Who does the president report to?
What must the report contain?
Is this a continuing duty to report?
What does Congress do with the report?
When Must the President Report?
What is the clock that the report starts ticking?
How long is it?
What is supposed to happen if Congress does not act before the clock runs out?
What tolls the clock, allowing the troops to stay?
The Joint Resolution
What does the resolution say Congress can do by concurrent resolution?
What does section 8, INTERPRETATION OF JOINT RESOLUTION, try to do to limit the president's actions?
Who is the Rule of Construction section aimed at?
Is this a proper role for Congress?
Is this binding on subsequent laws?
Why or why not?
Effect on Treaties
How does it attempt to turn all mutual defense treaties into non-self-executing treaties?
Is there a constitutional problem with this?
What treaty military actions did it leave unaffected?
unless such treaty is implemented by legislation specifically authorizing the introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into such situations and stating that it is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of this joint resolution. 
The Veto
Why did Nixon veto the War Powers Resolution?
Did it pass anyway?
Why did Nixon's veto undermine the original intent of the resolution?
Why did Nixon say it would undermine the president's ability to conduct foreign policy?
Have any subsequent presidents agreed to be bound by it?
What did Clinton do that violated it?
Strategic and Constitutional Issues
How might it encourage an enemy to keep fighting?
Why is the 60 day clock a constitutional problem?
Why is this exactly why Congress wanted it?
Why doesn't Congress want to vote on cutting off presidential action?
What was the first WPR report?
What was the "tanker war"?
Lowry v. Reagan, 676 F. Supp. 333 (D.D.C. 1987)
Who did the plaintiffs represent?
What did the plaintiff say was the effect of the president failing to file a report about the tanker war?
What did the court say was missing in the Act that made it impossible to resolve the case?
Without out this, who did the court say would have do decide if the act was triggered?
Koohi v. United States, 976 F.2d 1328 (9th Cir. 1992)
Who are the plaintiffs?
Why aren't they blocked by the provision in the FTCA  that prevents claims based on intentional actions?
Why doesn't the US claim it was a discretionary action?
What exception is the court reviewing?
What did Lowry say about the court deciding if there were hostilities going on?
What did this court say?
Are they answering the same question?
Crockett v. Reagan, 558 F. Supp. 893, 901 (D.D.C. 1982), aff’d, 720 F.2d 1355 (D.C. Cir. 1983)
What did the court say about whether courts should be ordering the president to pull out troops?
What are the problems with a court-ordered troop withdrawal?
Should the court assume that a majority of Congress opposed the use of force?
The Free Pass
[T]he defect at the heart of the WPR is that it has given both the President and Congress a putative free pass. In the actual contemporary exercise of war powers, perception has become reality as both the media and many members of Congress overlook the WPR’s disclaimer of authority [§8(d)(2), 50 U.S.C. §1547(c)(2) (2000).] Thus, some proponents of unilateral presidential action invoke the putative sixty-day free pass as license to use force abroad without constitutionally required advance authorization from Congress. Congress, for its part, takes false comfort that it has somehow fulfilled its constitutional duty to decide on uses of force abroad by doing nothing.
Should/Could Congress revise the War Powers Resolution to make it more effective?
Chapter 10 - Unilateral Self-Defense and Rescue
Unilateral Use of Force
What are the three classic justifications for the use of unilateral power?
Defense
Collecting bills
Reparations and punishment for past attacks
Does this extend to protecting citizens abroad?
Pirates and Private War
Why was there fewer restrictions on using force against pirates and aborigines?
Are pirates a better analogy for the war on terror than is general war?
Letters of Marque and Reprisal
Issuance of letters of marque and reprisal was renounced by signatories to the Declaration of Paris in 1856
The US did not sign the Declaration of Paris, but agreed to respect it during the Civil War and later, and it was superseded by Hague Declaration of 1970
Responding to General Attacks
What formality was required to respond to a general attack?
What about more limited attacks?
Why should the response be different to a limited action like the killing of a soldier, versus a general attack?
Is Imperfect War a Political Question?
Is the exercise of the imperfect war power simply negotiated between the political branches? 
If so, what is the point of studying legal limits on the imperfect war powers? 
Isn’t whatever is negotiated constitutional, and doesn’t the President hold all the cards in the negotiations?
The Gulf of Sidra Incident: Repelling (or Provoking?) Attack - 1986
What did Rep. Fascell think should trigger the WPR (War Powers Resolution)?
What did the White House say?
When did the White House notify Congress?
Was this a deliberate attempt to provoke Libya?
What happened in 1988 that might have been Libya's response?
Provocation
What is the problem of presidential provocation?
How can presidents provoke attacks within the legal confines of the WPR?
Was the Gulf of Tokin incident a fraudulent provocation?
What about sinking the Maine in the Spanish American War?
Durand v. Hollins, 8 F. Cas. 111 (1860)
Where did this take place?
What Captain Hollins sent to do?
What ended up happening?
Whose property was really being protected?
Who is bringing the lawsuit against whom?
What question does this defense raise about presidential powers?
Where does the court find that the power to order this type of retaliation resides?
Iranian Hostage Crisis Rescue Mission
Why did Secretary of State Vance oppose a rescue mission?
What repercussions did Vance fear?
Did Carter notify congress before the rescue?
What did presidential counsel Cutler cite as authority for not requiring Congressional authority for such a rescue?
Why was there no duty to notify Congress about the first stage of the rescue?
What was Cutler's catch all response?
The Hostage Act
Why did the United States Supreme Court decide that the Hostage Act did not apply?
What is the citizenship issue?
Why was taking hostages in reprisal left out of the Hostage Act?
Do you think the president can do this anyway?
How might the rescue power be a subset of the power to repel a sudden attack?
Is the capture of American citizens by itself a sufficient legal predicate for exercise of any implied presidential rescue power?
Why are the actions of local Navy commanders who are on the scene of attacks limited to: self-defense, ‘‘exercised only as a last resort, and then only to the extent which is absolutely necessary to accomplish the end required.’’ 
The 1998 Attacks on Sudan and Afghanistan: Striking or Striking Back?
What precipitated these attacks?
Did Clinton notify Congress in advance of the attacks?
What was the legal authority?
Why self-defense?
What does the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) say that was used to justify these attacks?
Could this have been used post-911?
Domestic Politics
What was going on domestically?
What is the Wag the Dog factor?
What is the appropriations argument for congressional authorization of such actions?
What caused Clinton to bomb Iraqi  Intelligence Service Headquarters in Baghdad?
Why is this a problem for legal justification?
Why does exempting attacks on terrorists not undermine the purpose of the WPR?
Assassinations
What does Executive Order No. 12,333 ban?
What is the traditional definition of an assassination?
Why is it a problem as public policy?
Is it defined in war time against combatants?
When can you kill civilians as well?
What are examples of the US targeting civilian populations directly, rather than as collateral damage to military attacks?
When are Assassinations OK?
Is there a provision of the United Nations Charter that might shelter assassinations?
Would Executive Order 12,333 ban killing al Qaeda members?
Who about their bankers?
Why might killing the bankers be really effective?
When should we use assassinations?
How do you get around Executive Order 12,333?
Can this be done secretly?
Chapter 11 - Collective Self-Defense
The UN
What was the League of Nations?
How well did it work?
What did the world's nations promise in Article 2(4) of the U.N. Charter?
What is the political history of the UN?
How was it regarded by conservatives before the Gulf War?
Review the Articles 
ARTICLE 39
The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain and restore international peace and security.
ARTICLE 40
In order to prevent an aggravation of the situation, the Security Council may, before making the recommendations or deciding upon the measures provided for in Article 39, call upon the parties concerned to comply with such provisional measures as it deems necessary or desirable. Such provisional measures shall be without prejudice to the rights, claims, or position of the parties concerned. The Security Council shall duly take account of failure to comply with such provisional measures.
ARTICLE 41
The Security Council may decide what measures not involving the use of armed force are to be employed to give effect to its decisions, and it may call upon the Members of the United Nations to apply such measures. These may include complete or partial interruption of economic relations and of rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio, and other means of communication, and the severance of diplomatic relations.
ARTICLE 42
Should the Security Council consider that measures provided for in Article 41 would be inadequate or have proved to be inadequate, it may take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security. Such actions may include demonstrations, blockade, and other operations by air, sea, or land forces of Members of the United Nations.
ARTICLE 43
1. All Members of the United Nations, in order to contribute to the maintenance of international peace and security, undertake to make available to the Security Council, on its call and in accordance with a special agreement or agreements, armed forces, assistance, and facilities, including rights of passage, necessary for the purpose of maintaining international peace and security. 
2. Such agreement or agreements shall govern the numbers and types of forces, their degree of readiness and general location, and the nature of the facilities and assistance to be provided.
ARTICLE 51
Nothing in the present charter shall impair the inherent right of individual and collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. . . .
Effect of the Articles
What would an Article 43 agreement create?
Why has there never been an Article 43 agreement?
How does this constrain UN peace-keeping actions?
How does Article 51 allow collective self-defense outside of UN control?
Why doesn't the UN Charter ban anything but UN-mediated actions?
Triggering the UN Provisions
How does the voting work on the Security Council?
How is the membership determined?
How does this act as a brake on the UN Resolutions interfering with US sovereignty?
Why does it make the UN ineffective in superpower proxy wars?
Executing the UN Charter
When was the United Nations Participation Act passed?
What does the United Nations Participation Act direct the president to do?
it directs the President to report any Security Council enforcement actions to the Congress. 
It also authorizes the President to implement any economic sanctions approved by the Security Council.
Statutory Rules
What is the limitation on presidential action under Article 43?
What is the President allowed to do under Article 42 without consulting with Congress?
What about non-military aid?
What if the president sees supporting the UN forces as important to US national security?
Funding UN Actions
Can Congress cut off funding for troops loaned to the UN?
Is this any different from other troop actions?
What if the UN comes up with money to support them?
Korea
Remember materials from the Youngstown case
Did the US commit troops before the UN resolution?
Why?
Did Truman ask Congress to authorize the use of troops?
Why?
Why did Truman argue that supporting South Korea was essential to preserving the UN?
Police Actions
Are UN actions like Korea and the Gulf War, wars?
What is a police action?
Does this have any meaning in customary international law?
What about as regards congressional powers?
Could Congress also declare war in a UN Action?
What would this mean?
First Gulf War
What made Iraq our ally in the 1980s?
What did we think was the real threat?
What did Resolution 660 say? 
Resolution 661?
What did Bush I do?
Why did he not need congressional permission for this?
What did the UN Participation Act allow?
War Powers Resolution
Did Bush I comply with the WPR?
Was there a joint resolution supporting the buildup?
What did the appropriations bills say?
What did Resolution 678 provide?
What did Bush I say about asking Congress for permission to invade Kuwait?
What did he ask for and why?
Did he get the resolution?
Restrictions on the Bush I's Powers
What did the resolution require before moving on Iraq?
Did Bush I make these findings?
In retrospect, did Bush I do what he should have done to authorize the war?
Chapter 12 - Preemptive War
The Timeline
The key is the timeline leading from the first Gulf War to the Invasion of Iraq in the second Gulf War.  Figure out what we knew and when, what did Congress approve, what did they base the approval on, and what powers the president used.
Look in particular at whether the president already had arguable authority to go to war left from the UN Resolutions and Congressional resolutions from the first Gulf War.
Preemptive War
What is the theory of preemptive war?
Why was the Iraq war a preemptive war?
What if you are wrong in your assumptions about the justification for a preemptive war?
Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002
Would the October 16, 2002, resolution pass the adlaw test of setting out intelligible principles to guide the executive?
Does it matter whether it does?
Will a court review it?
How much does the resolution depends on WMDs?
Does being wrong about WMDs make the resolution invalid as a basis for war?
How did it the affect the presidential primaries?
Could Congress Stop the War?
What did Massachusetts v. Laird, 451 F.2d 26 (1st Cir. 1971), tell us about what Congress would need to do to present a judicially reviewable issue?
What would it take to get past the appropriations safety valve for such review?
Practical politics
Were there ever enough votes in Congress to stop the war?
Why is this the only question that really matters?
Brave New World
How have things changed with the Obama presidency?
Is the proper working of the political process, i.e., is changing the president the best way to change war policy?
Chapter 13 - Humanitarian and Peace/Stability Operations
Constitutional Limits
Does the constitution allow the president to send humanitarian aid/Peace keeping aid without authorization from Congress?
Under the constitution, do you think the president has more authority to take military action or humanitarian action?
Statutory Authority
What does this statute allow - 10 U.S.C. §401. HUMANITARIAN AND CIVIC ASSISTANCE PROVIDED IN CONJUNCTION WITH MILITARY OPERATIONS?
What does 10 U.S.C. §404. FOREIGN DISASTER ASSISTANCE allow?
Does these limit the president or extend his power?
Protection or Provocation?
Which American citizens is the president protecting?
So, can the president hire Halliburton to deliver humanitarian aid, then send in troops to protect it?
Can the president also protect foreigners? 
What are examples?
Somalia
What crisis brought the UN into Somalia in 1992?
What did UN Resolution 794 provide for Somalia?
What was the initial US military involvement?
Did Congress support this?
Why did we go into Mogadishu?
What did the White House Counsel's office say was the core of the president's power to do this?
Battle of Mogadishu - October 1993
Black Hawk Down - 1993
What limits did Congress put in the appropriations bill after this?
What did the president do?
What was the impact of this on our response to the Rwandan Genocide - 1994
Foreign Control of US Troops
What potential constitutional problem is posed by putting US troops under foreign control?
Can Congress constitutionally prevent the president from putting troops under foreign control, if it is otherwise allowed?
Does it matter whether the actions in Iraq and Afghanistan are characterized as humanitarian, rather than military?
What about Pakistan?
What is the threat?
How has the situation changed over the past 2 years?
Why are we so worried about Pakistan?
The bomb?
India?
Why does it make Afghanistan a secondary issue?
Chapter 14 - Intelligence Operations
Why did the Intelligence Fail to Precipitate Appropriate Action?
Pearl Harbor - 1941 - The Japanese had already bombed bases farther West in the Pacific.
Why didn't we move the ships out of the harbor?
Bay of Pigs
4 American pilots and over 100 Cuban invaders were killed in battle | 1,400 Cuban invaders felt betrayed by their sponsor | One U.S. senator lied to the United Nations | One U.S. president was embarrassed in front of the world April 1961
Iran hostage crisis
Should the CIA have figured out that letting the Shah of Iran in was going to be trouble? 
Should they have emptied the embassy?
Is it failure of basic information?  Analysis? Strategic judgment?
Secrecy Policy
What can the government keep secret and how far can it go to do it?
What can the government do to collect intelligence, both foreign and domestic?
How far can the government go with covert operations as a tool of foreign policy?
What is the cost to domestic society as we increase surveillance of citizens?
Is it a good idea to move from clearly separated foreign/domestic and national/local surveillance and policing to an integrated national surveillance and policing system?
Keeping Secrets
Did the founders anticipate that there would be government secrets?
What about the constitutional convention itself?
What did they think of legislative history?
Was Congress allowed to keep its proceedings secret?
What was the practice for executive branch agencies until FOIA?
Why is congressional reporting a problem for secrecy?
Why did Ford object to broadening reporting requirements?
What can you do to a congressman who leaks info?
What if Berkley elects a communist to Congress?
What are the INTs?
human intelligence or espionage (HUMINT)
imagery intelligence (IMINT)
signals intelligence (SIGINT) and
measurement and signatures intelligence (MASINT)
 Except for open-source intelligence (OSINT), each of the INTs has a self-contained process, from collection to delivery.
The Nature of Intelligence
What is the stovepipe problem?
What is the raw material of intelligence?
What is the NSA getting when it scans a zillion phone calls?
What do covert agents get in most cases?
Why is it impossible to separate analysis from intelligence?
Why is it impossible to separate politics and bias from analysis?
What are the pros and cons of a single intelligence service in terms of analysis?
Origin of the CIA
What did the president do for intelligence before World War II?
Was there a specific foreign intelligence service?
What was the WWII agency that became the CIA?
Why is the Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949 seen as ratifying clandestine intelligence gathering?
What does the NSA do?
Federal, State, Local Distinctions
How is surveillance and policing done at the state and local level?
Did all of these levels communicate effectively?
Why could this be a problem?
Why was this division seen as important to protecting liberty?
Why do we elect sheriffs and judges, when their jobs call for specific skills that elections do not measure well?
What is are the risks of having a single agency covering everything from foreign to local, under a single executive branch secretary?
After 9/11
What did the 9/11 commission recommend?
Does this overturn the traditional division between domestic and international intelligence?
Historically, who did national domestic surveillance?
Who did foreign?
Why were they divided?
Does this division make sense?
Director of National Intelligence 
What is the Director of National Intelligence added after 9/11?
Who does Director of National Intelligence provide intelligence to?
What sources of intelligence does the Director of National Intelligence have access to?
What is the relationship between the DNI and heads of the NSA and the CIA?
What major source of info is missing from this description?
What threat do these provisions pose?
Protecting Civil Liberties
What is the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board?
Who does it depend on for its powers?
Why is this a problem?
Paying for the Intelligence Services
What are the Political and Secrecy Issues in the Intelligence Budget?
Why not give the agencies a blank check?
Why is congressional oversight problematic?
What are the Three Priorities of the National Security Strategy as stated in 2005?
The top two ‘‘mission objectives’’ identified in the Strategy are countering terrorism and halting weapons proliferation.
The third listed objective is to ‘‘bolster the growth of democracy’’ by having ‘‘collectors, analysts and operators’’ within the intelligence agencies seek to ‘‘forge relationships with new and incipient democracies’’ in order to help ‘‘strengthen the rule of law and ward off threats to representative government.’’
Why is the 3rd one problematic as a strategy?
Chapter 15 - Covert Action
Covert Action
What was Air America?
What is the downside of covert companies?
Somoza provided based in Nicaragua to attack Cuba
How did one port town come full circle?
What are the risk of covert operations?
Who was Manual Noriega?
Why do covert operations make you keep bad company?
Neutrality Act of 1794
Whoever, within the United States, knowingly begins or sets on foot or provides or prepares a means for or furnishes the money for, or takes part in, any military or naval expedition or enterprise to be carried on from thence against the territory or dominion of any foreign prince or state, or of any colony, district, or people with whom the United States is at peace, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
What did Jefferson say about the Neutrality Act?
If one citizen has a right to go to war of his own authority, every citizen has the same. If every citizen has that right, then the nation (which is composed of all its citizens) has a right to go to war, by the authority of its individual citizens. But this is not true either on the general principles of society, or by our Constitution, which gives that power to Congress alone and not to the citizens individually.
Does the Neutrality Act Apply to the President?
What if the president says it is alright for a private group to military action, say rescuing a hostage?
What about private companies training foreign armed forces to fight our friends?
What if we are at war?
...people with whom the United States is at peace...
What is the Logan Act?
Congress passed the Logan Act in 1799 to criminalize unauthorized efforts by U.S. citizens to ‘‘influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States. . . .’’
Could this have been used against Jane Fonda in the Vietnam War?
What about Sean Penn visiting Iraq?
Are there 1st amendment issues?
Has the law been enforced?
Implementing the National Security Act of 1947
Why is it hard to look back to 1947 and make determinations about covert action as it is currently understood?
Why might the formal congressional record not be an accurate picture of whether congress intended for the CIA to carry out cover actions?
Fifth Function - the CIA may: ...perform such other functions and duties related to intelligence affecting the national security as the President or the Director of National Intelligence may direct.
What did the CIA general counsel say in 1947?
NSC
What did annex NSC-4[/]A, adopted by the National Security Council (NSC) at its first meeting, provide?
How was this expanded by NSC-10/2?
Were these approved by President Truman?
‘‘Plausible Deniability’’
What is plausible denial and how does presidential approval undermine it?
How did Congress try to limit plausible deniability in 1974?
What is the recourse if the president does not comply with this law?
What does this tells about questions of whether CIA was authorized to carry our covert actions?
US v. Lopez-Lima, 738 F.Supp 1404 (1990)
What was defendant charged with?
How is it that he is on trial in the US?
Where did he spend most of the previous 20 odd years?
Who did the hijacker say sent him to Cuba?
Why?
Why a hijacking?
Strategy of the Defense
What is the defense?
What is the real purpose of the defense?
Does the CIA want to provide the information to support this defense?
What is the judge supposed to do if the legal effect of the agency not complying with a discovery order because the information is classified means that the defendant cannot mount an effective defense?
What is the Materiality Test?
What does the judge have to evaluate to determine if the information is essential to the defense?
In this case, is the information essential to the defense if the CIA did not have the authority to authorize the hijacking?
Can the defendant claim detrimental reliance?
What was the CIA's Authority in 1964?
What does Executive Order 12,333 provide?
Does this really tell us what the law is?  How can the president create an exception to this executive order?
Since Executive Order 12,333 was not signed in 1964, what do we need to know about it?
What did the Church Committee find that supports defendant's theory?
Even if the order was new policy, what else does the judge have to determine?
NSC Precedent
Why is Section 5 and NSC-4[/]A important in the court's analysis?
How was this expanded in National Security Council Directive 5412-1?
Did the CIA have to clear its actions with the Department of Justice?
Was there evidence that the agency carried out activities that broke laws?
What is the evidence that Congress did not care?
Post-Nixon
How did the Hughes-Ryan Amendment change this in 1974?
What prompted this amendment?
What did the court find about the authority of the CIA to authorize the hijacking?
What of the claims by the administrative that if it had authorized it, that would have been illegal and that defendant cannot rely on the authorization?
Defendant's Burden
What else does the court say the defendant must show to use this defense?
What will he need to do that?
How does this put the CIA in a bind?
Judge Ryskamp tossed out the air piracy charge during a two-day hearing on whether the defendant's right to a speedy trial had been violated.
The Cold War
There was little review of CIA covert operations through the 1950s - why?  
What does a 1954 report about the CIA tell us the thinking in those days?
What is the tension between accountability and secrecy for covert activities?
Chile
What was the CIA doing in Chile in 1970 and 1973?
Why were did we care about Allende?
Who came to power in 1973?
Why was our relationship with him problematic?
The Church Committee 1976
What was the Church Committee most concerned with?
What principles did it establish for covert activities?
Must be exceptional, not routine
Must be consistent with American principles
No clandestine funding FOR bad guys who do bad things just because they are on our side
Congress has to decide on that
Should consider long term consequences of the actions
Procedural Limits on Covert Action
What procedural limits did it recommend?
Everything is reported to the congressional oversight committee before it is done
Unexpected actions can only be funded from a fixed contingency fund, must be reported, and the fund will not be topped up until approved by the committee
How did Ford and Carter defuse the pressure for congressional action?
Statutory Changes
Is the proposed list of banned activities, page 393, realistic?
Was Congress able to pass this list and get it signed into law?
Intelligence Oversight Act of 1980
Review this act - it was all the formal legislation that resulted from the Church Committee
What are the duties?
What are limitations of the Act?
Does it require congressional permission for covert activities?
What is the duty of the House and Senate?
Which excuse for reporting to congress did this Act eliminate?
Executive Orders implementing the Church Committee report
Why did Ford and Carter want to do this by executive order rather than legislation?
What was Executive Order No. 11,905
Operations Advisory Group
What did Executive Order No. 12,036 do?
Replaced OAG with Special Coordination Committee
What does Executive Order 12,333 do?
Review and Implementation
What was the criticism of the reviewing role of the NSC?
What language did Regan leave out of Carter's definition of covert activity?
Is this legally significant?
What was the purpose of the intelligence oversight board (IOB) as constituted by Executive Order No. 12,334?
What are the Underlying Events?
Iran and Israel
Iran and Iraq
Lebanon
Nicaragua
Iran and Israel - 1980
What has just happened in Iran that has changed its long term policies?
Why is Israel dealing with Iran?
Where do the arms come from that Israel is providing to Iran?
Did Congress intend this?
Are there legal restrictions on this traffic?
Iran and Iraq
What was our relationship with Iran before Shah fell?
Which US official was friendly with Iraq?
Were we already supporting the transfer of arms to Iran?
Were we supplying arms to both sides at one point?
Lebanon
What is riveting attention on Lebanon?
Why is the US in Lebanon?
What has been the history of Lebanon since Iran-Contra?
Nicaragua
US Marines stabilize US friendly government from 1912-1933
Opposed by Augusto C. Sandino
In 1933, Sandino is part of a three way government with Somoza
Somoza kills Sandino and his family rules until forced out by Sandinista rebels in 1979
US opposes Sandinistas, supporting Contra rebels, even after Sandinistas are elected in 1984 
Sandinistas lose elections in 1990 and are out of power until they win again in 2006
Political Constraints on Regan
Why can't Regan openly support Iran?
Why is Congress so opposed to supporting the Contras in Nicaragua?
Why does Israel want to keep its support of Iran secret?
Who broke the story and when?
The Original Deal
What was the deal proposed by the Israelis that linked Iran and the Contras?
What was the objective of the deal?
What is the downside of this sort of deal ?
What about buying back slaves in Africa?
Why did the Contras get added to the deal?
Was the Arms Sale to Iran Legal?
Can the president authorize the sale of arms to Iran (through Israel) as part of his inherent constitutional powers?
Would this be easier to justify if the sale has been direct to Iran?
Hostage Act
What was the original intent of the Hostage Act?
Does it matter that the hostages were held by a different country than Iran?
What provision of the Hostage Act was ignored?
Arms Export Control Act
What does the AECA require before foreign arms sales?
the transfer ‘‘will strengthen the security of the United States and promote world peace,’’ and unless the transferee agrees in writing not to further transfer the items without obtaining the consent of the President.
What did Secretary of State Schultz determine in 1984 that complicates the use of the Arms Export Control Act and other legal authorities?
Was Israel respecting the no secondary transfer requirement?
Does the AECA Control?
What classification did the president use to get out from under the Arms Export Control Act?
But may the President avoid the AECA simply by labeling an arms transfer as a covert action?
Covert Acts under the National Security Act
What must the president do to trigger the right to use covert action under the National Security Act?
Who must he report to?
When did Regan say he was required to comply with the reporting requirement?
Using the Economy Act Through the National Security Act
What does the Economy Act provide?
What are the limitations of the Economy Act?
Is it open ended, allowing the president to rearrange the federal budget?
The Contras
What finding did Regan make on 1 Dec 1981 and convey to the Congressional intelligence committees?
What was the stated purpose of this finding?
...interdiction of arms shipments from Nicaragua to the leftist insurgents in El Salvador...
Was this limit respected?
Boland Amendments
What was the purpose of the Boland Amendments?
What were the Congressional conflicts over the Amendments?
How is this like the debate over limiting actions in Iran?
How is this different?
Boland II
What did Boland II provide?
What prompted this amendment?
What did Congress think the amendment meant?
Are there constitutional limits on acts such as the Boland Amendment?
There is no penalty provision in the Boland amendment - does it need one?
Interpreting Boland
First, does the language ‘‘any other agency or entity’’ cover only agencies traditionally involved in intelligence operations, or does it also apply to any entity that is actually so involved?
Second, does ‘‘involved’’ encompass indirect support? 
Third, does the phrase ‘‘no funds available’’ apply only to the then-current DOD appropriation or to all government funds?
How did the White House try it take advantage of its interpretation questions to get around Boland II?
Funding for Covert Operations
How does Congress provide funding for special forces so that they there is no detailed information about them in the budget?
Was it appropriate for the White House to use this money when the Congressional appropriations ran out for supporting the Contras?
The Funding Restrictions
What did the GAO report on government contracting say about the White House theory that the "no funds" provision only applied to funds in the defense appropriations bill that the Boland Amendment was part of?
Why might congress have used "no funds" rather than language about specific appropriations?
Putting aside policy and constitutional considerations, why is it a bad idea to allow private funds to avoid Congressional budget limitations?
The President's Involvement
What did Regan say about what he knew and authorized?
How did this defuse the impeachment issue?
What was later support for this position?
If there are no presidential findings, where does this leave the legal status of these activities, even if they might have been legal with presidential findings?
The Iran-Contra Affair in the Courts
US v. Terrell, 731 F.Supp 473 (1989)
What was the prosecution based on?
Why did the defendants say the Act did not apply?
What was the factual support for their claim?
What did the court find?
The Independent Counsel
The attorney general (Meese) requested an independent counsel
Judge Lawrence Walsh was appointed
Became a huge project
Indicted Poindexter, North, Secord, and Hakim
Conspiracy to violate the Boland Amendment
Obstruction of justice
Money crimes related to improper expenditures
Problems with the Prosecutions
Complicated because they had been granted immunity so they would testify before congress
Did congress intend to stop the prosecution?
Is it better to have the hearing or a conviction?
The white house refused to turn over classified documents requested by North's attorneys, resulting in the dismissal of most of the money crimes
Is criminal prosecution appropriate?
Nuremberg Defense
Why is it called the Nuremberg defense?
Was North just carrying out the president's policy?
What is the advantage of not protecting the individuals who carry out the policy?
What did the appeals court say about North's requested instruction that authorization by his superiors was a complete defense?
When did the appeals court say this might be a defense?
North played it as a patriot caught up in technicalities and made the fall guy by higher ups.
The Outcomes
North and Poindexter were convicted
The convictions were thrown out on appeal because they depended in part on immunized testimony
The independent counsel did not re-prosecute, finding it impossible to prove the case without running into immunity.
McFarlane pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges of withholding information from Congress.  He was pardoned by Bush.
Casper Weinberger was pardoned, foreclosing trial.
Six were pardoned, 5 after convictions.
Intelligence Authorization Act of 1991
What are the limits on covert action?
What are the directions on notification to avoid long delays?
Did the president say that he would always report?
What provision might violate INS v. Chadha?
Does reporting to the intelligence committees constitute notice to Congress?
What are the powers of the new IG under the act?
Will the Act make any difference?
Chapter 16 - Other Legal Problems in the Intelligence Field
Sample Selection Bias
What intelligence cases do you hear about?
WMD in Iraq
Bay of Pigs
What do these have in common?
Why are the successes hidden?
Breaking the German codes in WWII
What policy problem does this pose, i.e., how can you know who is telling the truth about intelligence services?
The Domestic Role of the CIA
‘‘the Agency shall have no police, subpoena, law enforcement power, or internal-security functions,’’ 50 U.S.C. [§403-4a(d)(1)
The original order from President Roosevelt to J. Edgar Hoover to begin internal security operations was to investigate foreign communist and fascist influence within the United States.
Were these investigations considered foreign intelligence?
Did Congress intend for the CIA to operate in the US?
Halkin v. Helms, 690 F.2d 977 (1982) (CIA)
Who were the plaintiffs?
Who were the defendants?
What was Operation CHAOS?
Operation CHAOS
(1) the CIA letter-opening program, which was directed at letters passing between the United States and the Soviet Union, and involved the examination of correspondence to and from individuals or organizations placed on a ‘‘watchlist’’; 
(2) the Domestic Contact Service, a CIA office which solicits foreign intelligence information overtly from willing sources within the United States;
(3) the CIA’s ‘‘Project 2,’’ which was directed at the infiltration of foreign intelligence targets by agents posing as dissident sympathizers and which, like CHAOS, had placed agents within domestic radical organizations for the purposes of training and establishment of dissident credentials; 
(4) the CIA’s Project MERRIMAC, operated by the Office of Security, which was designed to infiltrate domestic antiwar and radical organizations thought to pose a threat to the security of CIA property and personnel; and
(5) Project RESISTANCE, also a creature of the Office of Security, which gathered information on domestic groups without any actual infiltration. 
The Legal Issues
Was Operation CHAOS a valid CIA activity in the US?
What is the discovery fight and what did the court rule?
What is the effect of not allowing discovery on plaintiffs' efforts to get legal redress from a potentially illegal activity?
Where did the Court say the remedies should lie?
Executive Order No. 12,333.
Executive Order No. 12,333, anticipates that the CIA will engage in the 
‘‘collection of foreign intelligence or counterintelligence within the United States,’’ §1.8(a), and 
‘‘participate in law enforcement activities to investigate or prevent clandestine intelligence activities by foreign powers or international terrorist or narcotics activities.’’ §2.6(b)
How can these be reconciled with the lack of law enforcement power?
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004
 terms ‘‘national intelligence’’ and ‘‘intelligence related to national security’’ were defined to include 
‘‘all intelligence, regardless of the source from which derived and including information gathered within or outside the United States, that pertains . . . to more than one . . . agency; and that involves threats to the United States, its people, property, or interests; the development, proliferation, or use of weapons of mass destruction; or any other matter bearing on United States national or homeland security.’’
The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 and the CIA
What does the definition of intelligence related to national security seem to do to the CIA's right to operate in the US?
How did Congress limit this?
What type of intelligence did this apply to?
What is the CIA free to do in the US under the law?
How is this consistent with abolishing the foreign/domestic distinction?
The Director of National Intelligence and Internal Security
Is there any foreign/domestic limitation on the DNI?
Why not?
Why was this a priority for the 9/11 Commission?
Does it matter if the constituent agencies have limits if the DNI does not?
COINTELPRO
Who did COINTELPRO operations target?
Was this just intelligence gathering?
What sort of covert actions were carried out?
What were the long term goals of the operation against Black Nationalists?
Why was the FBI worried about the New Left?
What actions were recommended against the New Left? (p441)
This is one of the reasons behind academic hostility to the intelligence services and distrust of the government.
The FBI Enabling Act
The FBI operates on the basis of the Attorney General’s authority in 28 U.S.C. §533 (2000 & Supp. III 2003) to appoint officials:
(1) to detect and prosecute crimes against the United States;
(2) to assist in the protection of the person of the President; and . . .
(4) to conduct such other investigations regarding official matters under the control of the Department of Justice and the Department of State as may be directed by the Attorney General.
Hobson v. Wilson, 737 F.2d 1, 10 (D.C. Cir. 1984)
What was the result in Hobson v. Wilson, 737 F.2d 1, 10 (D.C. Cir. 1984)?
the plaintiffs prevailed against the FBI. The Court of Appeals stated, ‘‘Government action taken with the intent to disrupt or destroy lawful organizations, or to deter membership in those groups, is absolutely unconstitutional.’’ 
Why was the result different from Halkin v. Helms?
Would this rationale still be good today?
MI5
Should the US have an MI5 type agency that focuses on intelligence, leaving crime fighting to the FBI?
What are the advantages of this?
What are the disadvantages?
The NSA
What is the NSA and what intelligence does it process?
Does the NSA act on the intelligence it gathers?
Should you worry about the NSA combing through all of your communications and electronic transactions?
Does it matter if you are on a watch list?
How could that change?
What if the congressional committee finds out?
What are the issues of the NSA doing economic espionage to benefit US companies?
Covert Businesses for Intelligence Gathering
How is this different from using real private businesses to carry out intelligence operations?
What are the constitutional issues with front organization in the US? (4th amendment)
How do private businesses get around that?
What is the problem with using UN aid organizations to support private armies?
What about owning media and paying for propaganda?
What if reporters do not know they are working for a CIA front?
Harbury v. Deutch, 233 F3d 596 (2002)
Who killed plaintiff's husband?
What was the US involvement?
The Bivens Claims
Why use Bivens?
What were the Biven's claims based on?
(1) by contributing to Bamaca’s torture, CIA defendants violated his Fifth Amendment substantive due process rights; 
(2) by participating in and concealing information about Bamaca’s torture and murder, all defendants violated Harbury’s constitutional right to familial association; and 
(3) by concealing information and misleading her about her husband’s fate, NSC and State Department defendants violated her right of access to courts.
What is the Legal Situs of the Claims?
What does United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 U.S. 259 (1990) tell us about the claims of foreign nationals for actions that happen outside the US?
What claims does she have that concerned her own damages based on US conduct?
What is the problem with her bringing FTCA claims based on what happened?
Dealing with Dirty Assets
What did the National Commission on Terrorism report claim in 2000 about the effect of the reforms limiting CIA use of dirty assets?
Did the CIA say it slowed them down:
No one knows better than we do that when combating terrorism it is often necessary to deal with unsavory individuals. But we do so with eyes wide open and with appropriate notification to senior officials. . . . [The CIA] has never . . . turned down a request to use someone, even someone with a record of human rights abuses, if we thought that person could be valuable in our overall counterterrorism program.
Doing Business with Terrorists
Who do you need to do business with to learn about terrorists?
What about terrorists who become heads of state or of political parties?
Jerry Adams
Yasir Arafat
Menachem Begin
The Role of the Military
How is using the military for covert actions different from using the CIA?
Is it better to use the military?
What is the command structure confusion when special forces are used for non-military covert actions?
Are there potential conflicts when the military collects its own intelligence?
Chapter 17 - Defining Terrorism
Terrorism in the US prior to 9/11
Bombings with the Union movement - Haymarket Square
Have any presidential assassinations been terrorism?
Abortion clinic bombings
Oklahoma City
The earlier bombing of the World Trade Center
Were the Black Panthers a terrorist group?
PETA?
The Unibomber?
What are We Fighting?
Is terrorism the problem, or is terrorism just a technique, like the blitzkrieg?
Can we fight terrorism or do we have to fight the groups that sponsor it?
Why is this harder for NGO terrorists?
What about individuals with personal agendas?
Is terrorism a natural part of the modern world?
What makes a Crime a Terrorist Act?
Can you tell from the act itself?
Blowing up a city market as part of a protection racket?
Murder of a politician because of her views?
Drive by shootings in a drug war?
How is this like the definition of hate crimes?
Terrorists v. Freedom Fighters?
How does the frame of reference determine whether an act is terrorism or freedom fighting?
Is killing civilians the key?
Does it have to be intentionally killing civilians?
Do we give violent antiabortion groups the same attention as Islamic groups?
How does the characterize of the acts change in history when the terrorists win the conflict and become the legitimate government?
Why does the Legal Definition of Terrorism Matter?
The designation by the Secretary results in blocking any funds which the organization has on deposit with any financial institution in the United States.
Representatives and certain members of the organization are barred from entry into the United States.
Perhaps most importantly, all persons within or subject to jurisdiction of the United States are forbidden from ‘‘knowingly providing material support or resources’’ to the organization.
Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, 8 U.S.C. §1189
Definitions of Terrorism
NSDD-207
that terrorists use or threaten violence against innocents ‘‘to achieve a political objective through coercion or intimidation of an audience beyond the immediate victims.’’
State Department
‘‘premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents.’’
8 U.S.C. §1182(a)(3)(B)(iii)
(I) The hijacking or sabotage of any conveyance. . . .
(II) The seizing or detaining, and threatening to kill, injure, or continue to detain, another individual in order to compel a third person (including a governmental organization) to do or abstain from doing any act as an explicit or implicit condition for the release of the individual seized or detained.
(III) A violent attack upon an internationally protected person . . . or upon the liberty of such a person.
(IV) An assassination.
(V) The use of any—
(a) biological agent, chemical agent, or nuclear weapon or device, or
(b) explosive, firearm, or other weapons or dangerous device (other than for mere personal monetary gain), with intent to endanger, directly or indirectly, the safety of one or more individuals or to cause substantial damage to property.
(VI) A threat, attempt, or conspiracy to do any of the foregoing.
Must there be One Definition?
It is estimated that there are more than 150 slightly different definitions of terrorism in the USC
What is the legal significance of multiple definitions of terrorism?
Does this pose constitutional problems for vagueness?
First Trade Center Bombing - U.S. v. Yousef, 327 F.3d 56 (2nd Cir.(N.Y.)  2003) 
Is terrorism banned by jus cogens?
Are there acts that do violate jus cogens that could also be terrorism?
Were the Nazi death camps terrorism?
What did Justice Bork say about the definition of terrorism in customary international law?
Why did Justice Robb say it was non-justiciable?
People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran v. Department of State, 327 F.3d 1238 (D.C.Cir. , 2003) - cite is wrong in the book
What are the plaintiffs contesting?
What happens if they lose?
What did the court require the secretary to do for due process?
Why did plaintiffs say the notice of charges did not comply with the due process requirements?
What did plaintiffs admit they have done that the court thinks justifies the classification? (475)
Plaintiffs claim this law interferes with their 1st Amendment right of free speech. How does the court answer this?
Chapter 18 - The Fourth Amendment and National Security
Recharacterizing Crime as Terrorism
How does the new rhetoric at Homeland Security merge terrorism and crime?
What about meth labs?
What are the legal implications of calling gangs domestic terrorists?
How does it change law enforcement?
What about other agencies?
Organization
What about violent criminal enterprises in the US, like the Hell's Angels?
Which is a bigger enterprise, international terrorism or international crime?
What are the key legitimate businesses that are critical to both?
How does the US drug problem and drug laws directly support terrorism?
How does the US approach to drug laws build an infrastructure that supports international crime and makes it more difficult to control our borders?
What is the fundamental distinction between criminal investigation and anti-terrorism investigations?
What is the principle distinction between criminal law and administrative law, which supports the different warrant requirements for public health and criminal searches?
Where does terrorism fit in this?
Why is probable cause more difficult for terrorism than for criminal investigations?
When does a terrorism investigation become a criminal law investigation?
What constitutional issues are implicated in terrorism but not usually in criminal law?
How is the informational database for assessing the success of traditional law enforcement different from that for assessing the effectiveness of anti-terrorist activities?
What is the outlier problem for terrorism?
What is the credibility problem with terrorism stats?
Chapter 18 - The Fourth Amendment and National Security
Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 468 (1928)
Did this court apply the 4th amendment to wiretaps?
How did you make phone class in those days?
Were phone lines all private?
How might this have influenced the court?
Federal Communications Act of 1934
Makes it a crime for any person ‘‘to intercept and divulge or publish the contents of wire and radio communications.’’
Did the court apply this to federal agents?
Did the court apply it to national security?
Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967)
Did the Court find a constitutional right to phone privacy?
Would this apply to private persons?
What limits did the Omnibus Crime Control Bill of 1968 set on wiretapping?
What if the phone company hears a suspicious conversation as part of routine monitoring?
Did the Bill address national security?
US v US District Court (Keith), 407 US 297 (1972)
What is the underlying crime?
Was there foreign involvement?
What was the nature of the evidence gathering?
Was there a warrant?
How were the searches authorized?
The Government's Argument 
Did the Omnibus Crime Control Bill control?
What language excluded this sort of crime?
What is government arguing that this clause means?
Does the court buy this?
What Does the Constitution Require?
What is the real question before the court?
‘‘Whether safeguards other than prior authorization by a magistrate would satisfy the Fourth Amendment in a situation involving the national security. . . .’’
What is the argument that the AG is a substitute for a warrant?
Why does the court remind us that it is most suspicious of the government in national security cases?
Why does this undermine the AG as a substitute?
Issues with Warrants
What if they are not prosecuting you - how do you contest a search?
How do you even know they are watching you?.
Why does the government not want to ask a judge to approve a warrant?
Are these legitimate concerns?
What does the court rule?
Does the court leave the door open for statutory modifications of the warrant requirement?
Title III (18U.S.C. §2518(1)(b)-(d) (2000))
What are the specific requirements of Title III for electronic communications?
What other electronic communications  are protected by Title III?
Are these greater than the constitutional requirements for a warrant?
Why are these problematic for national security surveillance?
Could this be cured by requiring only the constitutional minimum?
Domestic organizations with foreign objectives
Zweibon v.Mitchell, 516 F.2d 594 (DC Cir. 1975)
What is the group?
What foreign policy problems where they causing?
Did the DC court require a warrant?
What about for wiretapping American citizens living in Berlin?
US v. Ehrlichman, 376 F Supp 910 (1974), affirmed 546 F2d 910 (1976)
Who did the break in?
Whose office did they break into?
Why?
Did the defendants have a warrant?
Who is on trial?
Is this a fight over the admission of warrantless information?
Why do warrants matter in this case?
The Authority
Was there any urgency in this break in, i.e., did they have to get a warrant?
Would a judge have given them a warrant?
What legal issues are involved in this search?
Where do the defendants claim to get the legal authority for the search?
Is this a foreign intelligence case?
Can the president order this?
Why does it not matter anyway in this case?
US v. Truong Dinh Hung, 629 F2d 908 (1982) (post-FISA)
What was Truong doing that lead to this case?
How was he caught?
Why didn't the government arrest him at once?
How did they conduct the investigation?
How was this authorized?
Who do they catch as the source?
Admitting the Evidence
How is this case distinguished from Keith?
What factors did the court base this finding on?
Why do Defendants say the evidence should not be admitted?
Does the nature of the surveillance change once they have established that defendant is selling secrets?
How does the primary nature of the search change at this point?
What test does the government want for deciding when national security surveillance standards apply?
What did the circuit court order?
The Primary Purpose Doctrine
What was evidence that the nature of the search changed in Truong?
What does the government need to do at this point if it wants to continue the search?
What if the national security search shows up unrelated crimes by persons not involved in national security activities?
For example, sellers of clandestine credit card readers who sell to terrorists
Chapter 19 - Congressional Authority for National Security Surveillance
Part I
Smith v. Maryland United States Supreme Court, 442 U.S. 735 (1979)
What is a pen-register and why did the police use them?
Are the customers of the phone company aware that this information was being collected by the phone company?
How is a pen register different from a Katz wiretap?
Why isn't the installation of the pen-register a search?
What is the search?
United States v. Miller, 425 U.S. 435 (1976)
Access to Bank Records
‘‘The depositor takes the risk, in revealing his affairs to another, that the information will be conveyed by that person to the Government. . . . This Court has held repeatedly that the Fourth Amendment does not prohibit the obtaining of information revealed to a third party and conveyed by him to Government authorities, even if the information is revealed on the assumption that it will be used only for a limited purpose and the confidence placed in the third party will not be betrayed.’’
Expectation of Privacy
Why did the defendant not have an expectation of privacy?
Why is the dissent concerned about basing the 4th amendment on reasonable expectations of privacy?
Has the court adopted the dissent's view over time?
Subsequent Legislation
What sort of warrant requirement did Congress enact?
Is this like an administrative search?
What does this standard about information provided to third parties tell us about social networking?
Information other than conversations that come from Internet and cell phone use?
Background for FISA
When was FISA passed?
What abuses in the Church Report drove the passage of FISA?
How about the concentration camp list?
United States v. Duggan, 743 F.2d 59 (1984)
What organization were the defendants part of?
What were they objecting to?
Who does FISA apply to?
Are Defendants Agents of Ireland?
What part of the definition of foreign power in FISA covers defendants?
How does this expand the traditional notion of a foreign power as a state?
How big does a group have to be to be a FISA foreign power?
FISA Definitions
What is a United States person?
What is the relevant definition of foreign intelligence?
What is the definition of international terrorism?
How does this definition try to differentiate ordinary crime?
FISA Warrants
What must the government show to get a FISA warrant?
What else must the government do if the target is a United States person?
What must the judge find that there is probable cause to support?
U.S. Persons
What additional finding must the judge make if the target is a US person?
What does this implicitly tell you about the review standard for non-US persons?
How does this differ from the requirements for a criminal law warrant?
The Real Meaning of FISA
Core question - Does FISA delineate 4th Amendment standards for foreign intelligence, or does FISA establish the standards for deciding that intelligence is outside the scope of the 4th amendment?
What did Congress think it was doing?
Given what we now know about the application of the constitution to foreigners outside of the US, if the judge finds that the intelligence is directed at foreigners outside the US, does the government need FISA at all?
In that situation, what is the role of FISA?
Where is FISA necessary?
The Holding
What did the judge hold about the FISA balancing of 4th amendment protections and the need to do foreign intelligence?
What about defendant's claims that foreign terrorism does not implicate US national security interests?
Why does this not really matter if all of the intelligence gathering is done outside the US on foreign nationals?
Standard for Reviewing the FISA Judge
How does the legislative history indicate that the appeals court should review the findings of the FISA judge?
Does this look like classic agency deference, rather than the review of a criminal law warrant?
What did the Senate report say about the overlap between foreign intelligence and criminal investigations?
The Primary Purpose Doctrine
What are terrorists usually prosecuted for?
What is the real problem that the primary purpose doctrine addresses?
When may the judge disclose supporting documents for the FISA warrant to the defense?
What is the standard for disclosing documents to the defense in the ordinary criminal proceedings?
FISA
What types of electronic surveillance does FISA contemplate?
Does FISA allow video surveillance?
How was the pen register language modified after 9/11 to include email?
What else might this allow the feds to collect?
How might an automatic out of office message get you in trouble under this law?
Physical Searches
How was FISA amended to include physical searches?
What are the limits on a physical search?
Is there a notice provision for the target?
Why are different procedures used than for criminal searches?
The Lone Wolf Provision
What is the "lone wolf provision" - 50 U.S.C. §1801(b)(1)(C)?
What does the "lone wolf provision" do to the notion of an agency of a foreign power?
The FISA Court
How is the FISA court selected?
What is the FISA appeals court?
Does the United States Supreme Court have jurisdiction over FISA appeals?
Why was FISA amended to require the Attorney General personally to review and to justify in writing any decision not to approve an application for a FISA order?
What is the problem with doing quality control on FISA requests?
FISA Expansion
How was the basis for probable cause under FISA expanded in 2000?
How does this broaden FISA?
Why should this make you worry more about mistakes by NSA in reading your email?
What does it mean for Jerry Adams?
What is the emergency exception for FISA?
In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001, 02-002 (FIS Court of Review) 310 F.3d 717 (2002)
What did the FISA court order to limit the use of FISA warrants for criminal law investigation?
What is the ‘‘chaperone requirement’’ in this case?
What if representatives of OIPR are unable to attend such meetings?
The Wall
What is the "wall" that the FISA court assumed existed?
How did the court find use the authority for minimization procedures to enforce this wall?
Despite the statutory language, what is the 4th amendment problem if FISA can wrap around criminal investigations?
Would this matter if the intelligence was not used for a criminal prosecution?
Reviewing United States v. Truong Dinh Hung
Why does the court say that United States v. Truong Dinh Hung does not apply to FISA?
How did the 1995 the Attorney General adopted ‘‘Procedures for Contacts Between the FBI and the Criminal Division Concerning Foreign Intelligence and Foreign Counterintelligence Investigations" enshrine Truong Dinh Hung?
What provision did the Patriot Act add to encourage the cooperation the FISA court was trying to discourage?
How did the 2002 Procedures for Contacts... supersede prior procedures?
Did the FISA court accept the 2002 revisions?
Minimization Procedures
What are the purpose of minimization procedures?
What do the minimization procedures allow as regard ordinary crimes?
What is the constitutional issue with the FISA court refusing to implement the 2002 guidelines?
The Patriot Act and the Primary Purpose Doctrine
How did the Patriot Act modify the purpose of FISA surveillance?
How does this implicitly do away with the primary purpose test?
What if the purpose is solely criminal investigation?
Will any defendant ever prove this?  Why not?
Who has the responsibility for reviewing the government purpose?
Limiting  United States v. Truong Dinh Hung
What did the court in Keith say about Title III warrant procedures for a domestic national security investigation?
What is the false premise of Truong in this Court's view?
The false premise was the assertion that once the government moves to criminal prosecution, its ‘‘foreign policy concerns’’ recede. 
How does the court distinguish previous check point cases?
Rather, the Court distinguished general crime control programs and those that have another particular purpose, such as protection of citizens against special hazards or protection of our borders.
How did the court rule?
Mayfield v. U.S., 504 F.Supp.2d 1023 (D.Or. Sep 26, 2007) (supplement)
What terrorist event triggered this case?
Who was the plaintiff?
What was done to him?
Did the government settle with him?
What is the suit about?
The Original FISA Warrant
What information, available at the time, undermined the findings presented for the FISA warrant?
What finding did the government make about plaintiff?
What is the standard for the court to reject this?
What makes it impossible for the court to determine if this standard is met?
The Legal Claim
Why is the change from primary purpose to significant purpose being foreign intelligence critical to this case?
How does this Court characterize the Patriot Act's revision of FISA?
"Moreover, the constitutionally required interplay between Executive action, Judicial decision, and Congressional enactment, has been eliminated by the FISA amendments."
What is the basis for this separation of powers argument?
Pre-FISA: Berger v. New York, 388 U.S. 41, 58-60 (1967)
In 1967, the Supreme Court held that a New York statute authorizing electronic surveillance violated the Fourth Amendment because: 
(1) “it did not requir[e] the belief that any particular offense has been or is being committed; nor that the ‘property’ sought, the conversations, be particularly described;” 
(2) it failed to limit the duration of the surveillance to impose sufficiently stringent requirements on renewals of the authorization; and 
(3) the statute “has no requirement for notice as do conventional warrants, nor does it overcome this defect by requiring some showing of special facts.” .
Why did the Berger court not care that this was an organized crime case?
Alternatives to FISA
Are there alternative criminal laws that could be used against terrorists?
Does the Court see these as a viable alternative to FISA?
What would the feds say about the limitations of using traditional criminal law warrants?
What does the court hold about the constitutionality of the Patriot Act amendments to FISA?
This case has not been followed by other courts, but there is not appeals court review.
NSA screening of International Phone Calls
Is pattern matching on electronic communications "reading the content"?
What are the impediments to getting FISA warrants for this screening?
Did FISA provide for area warrants?
Did FISA contemplate individual warrants for given individuals?
Could the government just put everyone on notice that foreign calls may be screened and eliminate the expectation of privacy?

Letter from William E. Moschella
Does the president claim intrinsic authority for national security searches, outside the 4th amendment and congressional authorization?
What statutory support does the president claim for the phone surveillance?
What exception from FISA does the president claim is satisfied by this authority?
Is this an unambiguous reading of both laws?
American Civil Liberties Union v. National Sec. Agency, 493 F.3d 644 (6th Cir 2007)  
Who are the plaintiffs?
What are the complaining that the NSA is doing illegally?
What provision of FISA seems to ban intercepting communications without a warrant?
The Standing Problem
Can any of the plaintiffs show that their calls have been intercepted?
Can anyone show this?
What would be required for this showing?
Why is that not going to happen?
Is this showing essential for standing?
Why isn't it necessary for a declaratory judgment that the agency is acting illegally?
What are the Damages?
What do plaintiffs argue is their damages?
Are they arguing that they are worried they will be arrested?
Even if true, why would you not bring it up?
What might damages be for an attorney with an overseas client?
Is this more than just invasion of privacy?
Do they have an alternatives to avoid interception of their messages?
Redressablity
What is redressablity?
Would they know if there was a proper warrant?
Think about plaintiffs' arguments about what they are worried about
Would any of their concerns be different if the search was based on a warrant?
Since they could not know if there was a warrant, would they be able to behave differently if the NSA said it would obey FISA?
The Court's Holding
Why did the court find that none of the plaintiffs had standing?
Could anyone get standing under this analysis?
Who would be the right party to bring an action?
Why is this unlikely?
Why did this make the telcom company immunity for complying such an important issue?
FISA Amendments Act of 2008
Does Section 702 create an area warrant for interception of communications originating outside the US?
Why does the Act have provisions allowing the communications companies to contest these warrants in court?
Why is there a provision granting the communications companies immunity from complying with these orders?
Chapter 20 - Third-Party Records and Data Mining
Part I
Smith v. Maryland
Looking back at this case, what is the court really saying about a reasonable expectation of privacy?
What does the court see within the ambit of a reasonable expectation of privacy?
Is it really an original intent approach, i.e., is the court looking to what the founders through of as personally private?
Has the Court always recognized a right of privacy beyond 4th amendment searches?
What would Jefferson have seen within the scope of privacy?
Letters?
His personal dwelling?
His dealings with his bank?
Does the Public's Expectation of Privacy Match the Court's?
If your employer can read it, can the government?
Banking records?
Transactions in general?
Do you think the general public thinks their banking records are private?
Their email?
Their tweets?
Why are transactions so valuable for intelligence?
Should the use of encryption be seen as probable cause for the government to go after the contents of the communication?
Warshak v. U.S., 490 F.3d 455 (6th Cir.(Ohio) Jun 18, 2007) 
Plaintiff seeks a declaratory judgment (facial challenge) that the provisions of the Stored Communications Act (SCA) allowing administrative subpoenas to his ISP for his emails is unconstitutional.
Plaintiff learned that emails had been released to the government and sought declaratory judgment and an injunction on behalf of himself and all other email users.
The Expectation of Privacy in Email
Why are analogies between ISPs and the post office misguided?
Why is there no expectation of privacy in bank records?
How does this court see email as different from bank records?
What about email in the hands of a recipient?
The Nature of the Expectation
How much of this expectation of privacy is due to statutes?
What if those changed?
What if the court said they did not apply for national security investigations?
Do you have an expectation of privacy if there are any exceptions?
The Contract with the ISP
Why does the contract with the ISP matter?
What about email on the employer's computer?
What about email on the University system?
Does it matter whether the ISP really looks at the email, or only has the right to?
What about gmail - how is Google like the NSA when it comes to email?
Warshak v. U.S., 532 F.3d 521 (6th Cir.(Ohio) Jul 11, 2008)  
The appeals court vacated the previous opinion
It applied an Abbott Labs analysis and rejected the facial challenge to the SCA
It found that the plaintiff had not made a proper showing under Abbott of imminent harm
It found that he had two ways of attacking the subpoenas
Motion to exclude evidence
Bivens action
Are these satisfactory?

National Security Letters
Are these issued by a judge?
National Security Letter on page 560
What does paragraph 3 (readable paragraphs) provide?
Does this apply to the entity's lawyer?
Does that raise constitutional issue?
Doe v. Ashcroft (Doe I), 334 F. Supp. 2d 471 (2004)
Who is Doe?
What type of records are requested?
Who should be worried about this NSL?
Does this include email content?
Is this information protected by law or is there a constitutional expectation of privacy?
How was Doe to provide the requested records?
Did Doe comply?
Alternative to NSL: Administrative Subpoenas
Courts will enforce the subpoena as long as: 
(1) the agency’s investigation is being conducted pursuant to a legitimate purpose, 
(2) the inquiry is relevant to that purpose, 
(3) the information is not already within the agency’s possession, and 
(4) the proper procedures have been followed.
What is the vehicle for judicial review?
Alternative to NSL: Criminal Subpoenas
Does a judge have to make probable cause determinations before  a criminal subpoena is issued?
How do you get judicial review?
Why are the standards different from search warrants?
How is the execution of the orders different?
Why does this allow a different path for judicial review?
National Security Letter Procedure
Why not just use administrative warrants or criminal warrants?
Why have a secrecy provision?
Who might Doe tell that would upset the feds?
How is this handled with criminal warrants?
Under Doe I, what had to be certified about the nature of the investigation to get an NSL?
Contesting an NSL
Does the statute forbid judicial review?
Would that be constitutional?
How does the agency intimidate recipients to avoid review?
How was Doe contacted?
How was he told to deliver the records?
What about talking to others?
What would a reasonable non-lawyer assume?
Is Intimidation a Legal Issue?
Roughly how many NSLs had been issued by the time of this case?
How many had been contested in court?
What did the judge conclude from this?
What did he rule about using §2709 in this manner?
Does §2709 Violate Subscriber's Rights?
What are the 1st Amendment issues with getting email addresses?
How is this different from access to back records and other transaction records?
What are potential examples?
What about header information, such as subject?
What about info on reading blogs, postings to lists, web sites visited, tweets read, etc?
What issues do these raise?
How is this different from pen registers?
Anonymous Internet Speech and Associational Activity
Should this be a constitutional right?
What if you attack others?
What did the judge think?
Are the protections of §2709 adequate?
Does the judge say that it could never meet the standard?
Is the Non-Disclosure Provision Unconstitutional?
Section 2709(c) states: 
‘No wire or electronic communication service provider, or officer, employee, or agent thereof, shall disclose to any person that the Federal Bureau of Investigation has sought or obtained access to information or records under this section.’
Is this a prior restraint or content restriction?
Is §2709(c) a Prior Restraint?
First, axiomatically the categorical non-disclosure mandate embodied in §2709(c) functions as prior restraint because of the straightforward observation that it prohibits speech before the speech occurs. As the Supreme Court articulated the threshold inquiry: ‘‘The relevant question is whether the challenged regulation authorizes suppression of speech in advance of its expression.’’
Can §2709(c) be Fixed by the Agency?
Does §2709(c) give the agency discretion to adopt a balancing test for governmental needs versus 1st Amendment rights?
Are there allowable restrictions on 1st Amendment activities?
John Doe, Inc. v. Mukasey (Doe V), 549 F.3d 861 (2008)
Amendments to the NSL Statute
No foreign state requirement
Consistent with the lone wolf provisions
Feds have to certify that there is a reason for secrecy
Court cannot review this certification
Recipient is clearly allowed to consult an attorney and contest the NSL in district court
The court may modify the order if oppressive
Analyzing the Amendments
These provisions present three issues for interpretation: 
(1) what is the scope of the enumerated harms? 
(2) what justifies a nondisclosure requirement? and 
(3) which side has the burden of proof?
Government Concessions
We will therefore construe subsection 2709(c)(1) to mean that the enumerated harms must be related to “an authorized investigation to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities,” 18 U.S.C. §2709(b)(1), (2), and construe subsections 3511(b)(2) and (3) to place on the Government the burden to persuade a district court that there is a good reason to believe that disclosure may result in one of the enumerated harms, and to mean that a district court, in order to modify or set aside a nondisclosure order, must find that such a good reason exists.
Comparison to Grand Jury Secrecy
Unlike the grand jury proceeding, as to which interests in secrecy arise from the nature of the proceeding, the nondisclosure requirement of subsection 2709(c) is imposed at the demand of the Executive Branch under circumstances where secrecy might or might not be warranted, depending on the circumstances alleged to justify such secrecy. . . .
Is Allowing Review in the Statute Enough?
Court's suggestion:
The Government could inform each NSL recipient that it should give the Government prompt notice, perhaps within ten days, in the event that the recipient wishes to contest the nondisclosure requirement. Upon receipt of such notice, the Government could be accorded a limited time, perhaps 30 days, to initiate a judicial review proceeding to maintain the nondisclosure requirement, and the proceeding would have to be concluded within a prescribed time, perhaps 60 days.
Deference To Administrative Discretion
Assessing the Government’s showing of a good reason to believe that an enumerated harm may result will present a district court with a delicate task. While the court will normally defer to the Government’s considered assessment of why disclosure in a particular case may result in an enumerated harm related to such grave matters as international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities, it cannot, consistent with strict scrutiny standards, uphold a nondisclosure requirement on a conclusory assurance that such a likelihood exists.
Can Judges Make These Determinations?
We have every confidence that district judges can discharge their review responsibility with faithfulness to First Amendment considerations and without intruding on the prerogative of the Executive Branch to exercise its judgment on matters of national security. Such a judgment is not to be second-guessed, but a court must receive some indication that the judgment has been soundly reached. As the Supreme Court has noted in matters of similar gravity, the Constitution “envisions a role.
What About the Statutory Standard for Review?
The Court deemed inconsistent with strict scrutiny standards the provision of subsections 3511(b)(2) and (b)(3) specifying that a certification by senior governmental officials that disclosure may “endanger the national security of the United States or interfere with diplomatic relations . . . shall be treated as conclusive unless the court finds that the certification was made in bad faith.” 18 U.S.C. §3511(b)(2). We agree.
Can the Executive Branch Save the Amendments without Legislation?
We deem it beyond the authority of a court to “interpret” or “revise” the NSL statutes to create the constitutionally required obligation of the Government to initiate judicial review of a nondisclosure requirement. However, the Government might be able to assume such an obligation without additional legislation. As we discussed in Part IV(b)(i), supra, the Government’s concern about the potentially substantial burden of initiating litigation can be readily alleviated by use of the reciprocal notice procedure we have suggested.
United States Dept. of Justice v. Reporters Comm. for Freedom of the Press, 489 U.S. 749 (1989)
What is the theory of expectation of privacy through obscurity?
Is this really an administrative cost argument for expectation of privacy?
How has the world changed since this opinion?
Is this still a useful theory, or have we given up expectations of privacy based on administrative costs?
Library records
Why is access to library check out records so controversial?
How about video store rentals?
Netflix?
Online porn?
The Patriot Act
Patriot Act Improvement limited access to library records, but did not end access:
It left libraries subject to §215 orders, however, although it also limited the number of FBI officials who could approve §215 applications for library records, 
It also limited access to:  ‘‘book sales records, book customer lists, firearms sales records, tax return records, educational records, or medical records containing information that would identify a person.’’
Are these all the same sort of records?
Whalen v. Roe, 429 U.S. 589 (1977)
"We are not unaware of the threat to privacy implicit in the accumulation of vast amounts of personal information in computerized data banks or other massive government files. . . . The right to collect and use such data for public purposes is typically accompanied by a concomitant statutory or regulatory duty to avoid unwarranted disclosures. Recognizing that in some circumstances that duty arguably has its roots in the Constitution, nevertheless New York’s statutory scheme, and its implementing administrative procedures, evidence a proper concern with, and protection of, the individual’s interest in privacy."
Data Mining
What is data mining?
Why is it so important commercially?
What is the business model for Gmail?
What about companies that buy your credit card and grocery store data?
Are the restrictions on private data mining?
Why does this make limits on governmental data mining ineffective?
Chapter 21 - Screening for Security
History
What were the Black September hijackings in 1970?
What lesson did not we not learn from those hijacking that made 9/11 possible?
Cabin doors?
Policy on resisting hijackers?
9/11
Why did they hold the checked baggage of the suspects on 9/11?
What false assumption was that based on?
What did the hijackers use for ID?
Where did they likely get the idea of using airplanes as weapons?
Airport Searches
What is the adlaw rationale for passenger searches from the Davis case?
How could a person opt out the search?
How did this make it a consent issue?
U.S. v. Aukai, 497 F.3d 955 (9th Cir.(Hawai'i) Aug 10, 2007)
Does away with the consent theory in Davies - once you are in the line, you cannot opt out
Is the consent now entering the airport?
MacWade v. Kelly, 460 F.3d 260 (2d Cir. 2006)
Have subways been the targets of terrorist bombers?
Why are they such attractive targets?
Why not do airport level searches?
The Search
What are they searching?
Do they search everyone?
How do they pick people to search?
Why?
Do you really believe it?
What do you think the police are going to do if someone walks away?
Does the search really intend to find implements of destruction?
What is the real purpose?
The Checkpoints
Where are the checkpoints located?
What are people told as the enter the subway?
Do they check ID?
Do they read what you have?
Do the guards go through your stuff themselves?
How can folks avoid the search?
Can you avoid the search and ride?
The Special Needs Exception
First, as a threshold matter, the search must “serve as [its] immediate purpose an objective distinct from the ordinary evidence gathering associated with crime investigation.”
Is this an administrative search under a different name or an exception such as the plain view test?
How does the result affect the admission of criminal evidence, or would it?
The Balancing Test
(1) the weight and immediacy of the government interest
(2) “the nature of the privacy interest allegedly compromised by” the search; 
(3) “the character of the intrusion imposed” by the search; and 
(4) the efficacy of the search in advancing the government interest.
Privacy Expectations
Does the special needs test depend on a reduced expectation of privacy?
What is the role of reduced expectation of privacy in regulated industry cases?
Is it a part of the general area warrant case, i.e. for rat inspections?
Could you say in the alternative that an airline passenger has a reduced expectation of privacy?
The Special Need
What is the search targeting?
Based on this court's analysis, what if they find a stash of cocaine?
Could they seize it?
Could they prosecute based on finding it?
Does there have to be a threatened attack?
Must the state use the least intrusive means?
Judging Effectiveness
Where does effectiveness come into the legal analysis?
What are the problems with judging effectiveness?
What issues do the plaintiff's raise, i.e., why do warning matter to their argument?
What would be the irony in finding the program ineffective because it is narrowly targeted?
Who does the court defer to?
The Ruling
What did the court find?
How far could we go with screening on mass transit?
What do you think we would do if there were a couple of subway bombings in the US?
Government Building Entry
What about searches of persons entering government buildings?
Are these allowed?
How intrusive can they be?
What about the new low power scattering x-ray that can see through your clothes?
Gilmore v. Gonzales, 435 F.3d 1125 (CIR 9 2006)
Is a request for an ID a 4th Amendment search?
Even if it is, is an airline bound by the 4th Amendment?
Would there be a different result if you are arrested for not showing an ID?
What is your alternative if you do not want to comply?
Why doesn't this violate the constitutional right to travel?
Why does the court say this is not a penalty?
Proving Who is Who
A primary problem with watch lists is that there are usually many people with each name on the list, sometimes hundreds.
What information do you need to make the list specific to an individual?
How secure are current ids such as driver licenses?
What does the Real ID Act require?
Security features that must be incorporated into each card 
Verification of information provided by applicants to establish their identity and lawful status in the United States 
Physical security standards for locations where licenses and identification cards are issued. 
These standards must be met to allow the card holder to board planes, enter federal buildings and nuclear power plants.
Must be done by December 31, 2009 - do you have one?
Practical Problems
How much do you trust the states to really verify the underlying info?
If electronic access is provided to all states, how long before it is on the internet?
What are the implications of public access to the information?
National ID Cards - Your Papers Please
What are the issues with national ID cards?
Why have they been resisted by both the right and the left?
What info would they need to be really secure?
Would you have to carry the ID at all times?
Who could ask you for it?
Checking Your Papers
Could you be stopped without specific suspicion and asked for your ID?
Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial Dist. Court Of Nev., 542 U.S. 177 (2004) - Terry stop
Tag scanners in public places
What about making your ID remotely readable like tags on shipping crates?
What issues would you worry about with remote reading tags?
How could it reduce racial profiling in one scholar's view?
Government Watch Lists
Do the courts award damages for persons who are wrongly detained?
What if you miss your flight?
Does the airline refund your ticket or rebook you?
What is the United States Supreme Court's "stigma plus" test?
What did the perverts are US (internet sites with sex offenders, like frat boys who mooned someone) cases tell us about the nature of the plus?
Does there have to be a procedure for getting off the list?
Private Use of Watch Lists
The government shares watch lists with private businesses.
What is the error rate on watch lists?
What happens when the private business denies you a loan because of the watch list?
Do they have to tell you?
Since the feds do not give them info about the background of the listed persons, is there any way you can prove you are not targeted person
How about when you are turned down for job?
Profiling
What is profiling?
Is this profiling?
In conducting activities in connection with a specific investigation, Federal law enforcement officers may consider race and ethnicity only to the extent that there is trustworthy information, relevant to the locality or time frame, that links persons of a particular race or ethnicity to an identified criminal incident, scheme, or organization. This standard applies even where the use of race or ethnicity might otherwise be lawful.

Epidemiology of Crime
What if a racial or ethnic group is associated with higher levels of crime in an area - should profiling data be based on their prevalence in the population or their prevalence in prison?
What if there is specific risk information for a given time and place?
Did we detain non-citizen Muslin men after 9/11?
Was this an appropriate risk-based detention?
The Problems with Profiling
Why are we worried about racial profiling?
Religious profiling?
What were the characteristics of all of the al Qaeda terrorists in 9/11?
What does randomly searching Granny at the airport do for the public's perception of the effectiveness of TSA random screening?
Illegal Aliens
Can you profile based on folks being illegal aliens?
Is it a profile at all if they are illegal?
Do illegal aliens have any claims for profiling or other directed law enforcement, since they are guilty of breaking immigration laws?
Can you attack cases against illegal aliens based on discrimination?
When can you screen at a checkpoint based on race?
Behavioral Profiling
What is behavioral profiling?
How can it be a mask for racial or ethnic profiling?
Why is the flight attendant talking to passengers as they enter the plane?
What about the uneducated poor or persons who are not accustomed to flying?
What does Israel do?
Would that be tolerated in the US?
Tabbaa v. Chertoff, 509 F.3d 89 (2nd Cir. 2007)
Are plaintiffs US citizens?
Why was CBP concerned about the Reviving the Islamic Spirit Conference (“RIS Conference”)?
Where was the conference held?
Where were plaintiffs detained?
What was done to them?
Was this based on their religious beliefs?
The Border
What is the constitutional basis for different rules at the border?
What is the practical reason?
What does the court tell us about the reasonable expectations of any person, including US citizens, returning to the US?
What about your computer?
How does this trump the right of association?
What is the balancing test?
Why was this considered a minor intrusion?
The Limits
Are there limits to what can be done at the border?
What examples did the court give of more extreme measures?
Is the court saying they cannot be done, or that you need to warrant to do them?
What could have been done to them if they had not been US citizens but were only on residence visas?

Chapter 22: Organization and Coordination of Counterterrorism Investigations
Limitations on the CIA
(a) The Central Intelligence Agency. The Director of the Central Intelligence Agency shall:
(1) Collect (including through clandestine means), analyze, produce, and disseminate foreign intelligence and counterintelligence;
(2) Conduct counterintelligence activities without assuming or performing any internal security functions within the United States; . . .
(7) Perform such other functions and duties related to intelligence as the Director may direct. . . .
Very limited authority to act in the US
What about the NSA?
These procedures shall not authorize:
(a) The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to engage in electronic surveillance within the United States except for the purpose of training, testing, or conducting countermeasures to hostile electronic surveillance;
Does this limit the NSA?
The Operation CHAOS Provisions
No one acting on behalf of elements of the Intelligence Community may join or otherwise participate in any organization in the United States on behalf of any element within the Intelligence Community without disclosing such person’s intelligence affiliation to appropriate officials of the organization, except in accordance with procedures established by the head of the Intelligence Community element concerned or the head of a department containing such element and approved by the Attorney General, after consultation with the Director.
The Enabling Act for the FBI
(1) to detect and prosecute crimes against the United States;
(2) to assist in the protection of the person of the President; and . . .
(4) to conduct such other investigations regarding official matters under the control of the Department of Justice and the Department of State as may be directed by the Attorney General.
Given this level of detail, where do we look for the operational information about the FBI?
The Brave New World
[C]ontinuing coordination . . . is necessary to optimize the FBI’s performance in both national security and criminal investigations . . . . [The] new reality requires first that the FBI and other agencies do a better job of gathering intelligence inside the United States, and second that we eliminate the remnants of the old “wall” between foreign intelligence and domestic law enforcement. Both tasks must be accomplished without sacrificing our domestic liberties and the rule of law, and both depend on building a very different FBI from the one we had on September 10, 2001.
The Seamless Web
Hence, these Guidelines do not require that the FBI’s information gathering activities be differentially labeled as “criminal investigations,” “national security investigations,” or “foreign intelligence collections,” or that the categories of FBI personnel who carry out investigations be segregated from each other based on the subject areas in which they operate. Rather, all of the FBI’s legal authorities are available for deployment in all cases to which they apply to protect the public from crimes and threats to the national security and to further the United States’ foreign intelligence objectives.
The Changing Role of the FBI
What is the traditional role of the FBI?
How does becoming an intelligence agency change this role?
Can the agency do both without significant additional resources?
What will suffer?
Don't Do Evil
These Guidelines do not authorize investigating or collecting or maintaining information on United States persons solely for the purpose of monitoring activities protected by the First Amendment or the lawful exercise of other rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States. These Guidelines also do not authorize any conduct prohibited by the Guidance Regarding the Use of Race by Federal Law Enforcement Agencies.
Section II of the 2003 Guidance on the Use of Race
 “federal law enforcement officers who are protecting national security . . . may consider race, ethnicity and other relevant factors to the extent permitted by our laws and the Constitution.” When engaged in traditional law enforcement activities, officers may not use race or ethnicity to any degree, except that officers may rely on race or ethnicity in a specific suspect description.
Why are there different standards for law enforcement and national security?
What do the Guidelines Really Tell Us?
Departures from these Guidelines must be approved by the Director of the FBI, by the Deputy Director of the FBI, or by an Executive Assistant Director designated by the Director. If a departure is necessary without such prior approval because of the immediacy or gravity of a threat to the safety of persons or property or to the national security, the Director, the Deputy Director, or a designated Executive Assistant Director shall be notified as soon thereafter as practicable. The FBI shall provide timely written notice of departures from these Guidelines to the Criminal Division and the National Security Division, and those divisions shall notify the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General.
Are There Limits on Investigations?
The scope of authorized activities under this Part is not limited to “investigation” in a narrow sense, such as solving particular cases or obtaining evidence for use in particular criminal prosecutions. Rather, these activities also provide critical information needed for broader analytic and intelligence purposes to facilitate the solution and prevention of crime, protect the national security, and further foreign intelligence objectives. . . .
What about Information about Activities not Related to the Primary Investigation?
In the course of activities under these Guidelines, the FBI may incidentally obtain information relating to matters outside of its areas of primary investigative responsibility. For example, information relating to violations of state or local law or foreign law may be incidentally obtained in the course of investigating federal crimes or threats to the national security or in collecting foreign intelligence. These Guidelines do not bar the acquisition of such information in the course of authorized investigative activities, the retention of such information, or its dissemination as appropriate to the responsible authorities in other agencies or jurisdictions. . . .
What Can Trigger an Investigation?
a. An activity constituting a federal crime or a threat to the national security has or may have occurred, is or may be occurring, or will or may occur and the investigation may obtain information relating to the activity or the involvement or role of an individual, group, or organization in such activity.
b. An individual, group, organization, entity, information, property, or activity is or may be a target of attack, victimization, acquisition, infiltration, or recruitment in connection with criminal activity in violation of federal law or a threat to the national security and the investigation may obtain information that would help to protect against such activity or threat.
Prextext Interviews
A pretext interview occurs if an FBI agent interviews someone without
identifying himself as an FBI agent, or without correctly stating the purpose of the interview.
What legal issues do these pose?
What if you client lies?
Can this be a form of entrapment?
What is the Legal Effect of the Guidelines?
These are guidelines in the classic adlaw sense.
They are not binding on the agency, and not a source of legal rights.
Why is that important if your client is alleging that the guidelines were not followed?
Could you use them as the basis for a Bivens action?
What is your client's recourse for violations?
Chapter 23 - Surveillance Abroad
Part I
Reid v. Covert, 354 US 1 (1957)
What is very unusual procedurally in this case?
What are the ‘‘Insular Cases’’? 
Did Justice Black find that the US constitutional requirements for a jury trial applied to US citizens abroad?
What about the constitution in general?
Justice Harlan
The Government, it seems to me, has made an impressive showing that at least for the run-of-the-mill offenses committed by dependents overseas, such a requirement would be as impractical and anomalous as it would have been to require jury trial for Balzac in Porto Rico. . . .
I do not concede that whatever process is ‘‘due’’ an offender faced with a fine or a prison sentence necessarily satisfies the requirements of the Constitution in a capital case. . . . The number of such cases would appear to be so negligible that the practical problems of affording the defendant a civilian trial would not present insuperable problems.
The 4th Amendment outside the US - US v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 US 259 (1990) 
Was the defendant a US person?
Where was the search?
The 4th Versus 5th and 6th Amendments
...‘‘the people’’ protected by the Fourth Amendment, and by the First and Second Amendments, and to whom rights and powers are reserved in the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, refers to a class of persons who are part of a national community or who have otherwise developed sufficient connection with this country to be considered part of that community. The language of these Amendments contrasts with the words ‘‘person’’ and ‘‘accused’’ used in the Fifth and Sixth Amendments regulating procedure in criminal cases.
Domestic Application
What we know of the history of the drafting of the Fourth Amendment also suggests that its purpose was to restrict searches and seizures which might be conducted by the United States in domestic matters. . . . The available historical data show, therefore, that the purpose of the Fourth Amendment was to protect the people of the United States against arbitrary action by their own Government; it was never suggested that the provision was intended to restrain the actions of the Federal Government against aliens outside of the United States territory.
The Prize Cases
Did the captain's liability depend on an extra territorial application of the 4th Amendment?
Was the statute authorizing the seizures seen as an extension of the captain's powers or a limitation?
What would a modern president say about such a limitation?
Dorr v. United States, 195 U.S. 138 (1904)
"...we declared the general rule that in an unincorporated territory— one not clearly destined for statehood—Congress was not required to adopt ‘‘a system of laws which shall include the right of trial by jury, and that the Constitution does not, without legislation and of its own force, carry such right to territory so situated.’’ 195 U.S. at 149 (emphasis added). Only ‘‘fundamental’’ constitutional rights are guaranteed to inhabitants of those territories. . . . [C]ertainly, it is not open to us in light of the Insular Cases to endorse the view that every constitutional provision applies wherever the United States Government exercises its power.
What rights would apply in such territory?
What are these rights?
Johnson v. Eisentrager, 339 U.S. 763 (1950)
Enemy aliens arrested in China and imprisoned in Germany after World War II
How did the court rule in Johnson?
How does the court distinguish Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957)?
How would a universal application of the US Constitution affect our ability to use the military abroad?
This was the primary precedent until the Guantanamo cases
What is Really Happening in Foreign Actions?
Justice Blackmun wrote: American agents acting abroad generally do not purport to exercise sovereign authority over the foreign nationals with whom they come in contact. 
What does this mean?  
Is this the key to understanding the foreign/domestic constitutional application questions?
Harbury v. Deutch, 233 F.3d 596 (D.C. Cir. 2000)
What does this case tell us about the application of the 5th amendment to torture of foreign nationals done in foreign nations?
The Detainee Treatment Act of 2005
‘‘No individual in the custody or under the physical control of the United States Government, regardless of nationality or physical location, shall be subject to cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment.’’
We will see how well it was followed
In re Terrorist Bombings of U.S. Embassies in East Africa, 552 F.3d 157 (Cir2 2008)
Search of a US citizen's home and electronic communications in Africa
Was there a warrant?
What is the defendant asking the court to do in this appeal?
The Physical Search
Was this a clandestine search?
Who was present?
Was there an inventory?
Was there evidence of Kenyan legal process?
The Suppression Hearing
Was there a traditional suppression hearing?
What was the process?
Was it open to the public?
Was the defendant allowed to attend?
Why?
The court characterized the review as mostly legal, rather than factual
Why is this important to the courts' ruling?
Extraterritorial Application of the Fourth Amendment
Had previous cases found that the 4th Amendment applied to foreign searches of US citizens?
The court bifurcates the 4th Amendment analysis into the reasonableness clause and the warrant clause
What does this mean?
The Purpose of the Warrant
What does it mean that the warrant is to protect separation of powers?
Why is this diminished for foreign searches?
"First, a domestic judicial officer’s ability to determine the reasonableness of a search is diminished where the search occurs on foreign soil. 
"Second, the acknowledged wide discretion afforded the executive branch in foreign affairs ought to be respected in these circumstances.
Would a US warrant have any legal effect in Africa?
No Warrant Necessary
(1) the complete absence of any precedent in our history for doing so, 
(2) the inadvisability of conditioning our government’s surveillance on the practices of foreign states, 
(3) a U.S. warrant’s lack of authority overseas, and 
(4) the absence of a mechanism for obtaining a U.S. warrant.
Is there another reason you might want a warrant?
The Reasonableness Inquiry - Were the Searches Reasonable?
To determine whether a search is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment, we examine the “totality of the circumstances” to balance “on the one hand, the degree to which it intrudes upon an individual’s privacy and, on the other, the degree to which it is needed for the promotion of legitimate governmental interests.”

Search of the House
How was the search conducted?
Was there probable cause?
How long were they watching him?
Did the court say probable cause was essential?
What is his privacy balanced against?

Electronic Surveillance
El-Hage appears to challenge the reasonableness of the electronic surveillance of the Kenyan telephone lines on the grounds that 
(1) they were overbroad, encompassing calls made for commercial, family or social purposes and 
(2) the government failed to follow procedures to “minimize” surveillance.
Justifications for Electronic Surveillance
First, complex, wide-ranging, and decentralized organizations, such as al Qaeda, warrant sustained and intense monitoring in order to understand their features and identify their members.
Second, foreign intelligence gathering of the sort considered here must delve into the superficially mundane because it is not always readily apparent what information is relevant.
Third, members of covert terrorist organizations, as with other sophisticated criminal enterprises, often communicate in code, or at least through ambiguous language.
Fourth, because the monitored conversations were conducted in foreign languages, the task of determining relevance and identifying coded language was further complicated.
United States v. Barona, 56 F.3d 1087 (9th Cir. 1995)
The majority looked to good faith compliance with the law of the foreign country where the surveillance was conducted, absent conduct that shocks the conscience. In fact, the United States has entered into a growing number of bilateral mutual legal assistance treaties (MLATs), which independently require U.S. officials operating abroad to comply with the law of the foreign state.
What if the foreign courts are more flexible than the US courts?
Do you think this is still good law and policy in light of the current (post 9/11) FBI guidelines?
Reliance on Foreign Process
What if the US has signed an agreement with the foreign government to use its legal process, then fails to?
Should this be the basis for excluding the evidence if it would otherwise be admissible?
Does the Silver Platter doctrine apply to foreign police or governments?
How would the joint venture limitation apply?
The Shocks-the-Conscience Exception to the Silver Platter Doctrine
US v. Fernandez-Caro, 677 F. Supp. 893 (S.D. Tex. 1987)
The conduct of the Mexican police officials violated even minimal standards of decency expected in a civilized society. Certainly the abuse of Defendant exceeded the conduct which ‘‘shocked the conscience’’ of the United States Supreme Court in Rochin v. California, 342 U.S. 165 (1952). Even more than in Rochin, the methods employed here were ‘‘too close to the rack and the screw’’ to be acceptable.
What is this worth after Guantanamo and extraordinary rendition?
Statutory Endorsement of the Foreign Silver Platter Doctrine
Congress authorized the intelligence community to collect information outside the United States against non-U.S. persons at the request of law enforcement agencies, ‘‘notwithstanding that the law enforcement agency intends to use the information collected for purposes of a law enforcement investigation or counterintelligence investigation.’’ 50 U.S.C. §403-5a(a) (2000)
What about the joint actor doctrine if they cooperate with local authorities?
Chapter 24 - Civil Detention Of Terrorist Suspects
Citizens v. Non-Citizens
How are the legal rights of non-citizens different from citizens?
How do the legal rights of non-citizens change when their visa expires or they otherwise violate the terms of their stay in the US?
Can non-citizens be deported for low level crimes?
How was this used in the PENTTBOM investigations?
Spitting on the sidewalk?
Absconder Apprehension Initiative
Who did the ‘‘Absconder Apprehension Initiative’’ target?
Why isn't this unconstitutional as profiling by national origin?
Was the FBI careful to distinguish between actual terrorist subjects and persons only incidentally picked up as part of the ‘‘Absconder Apprehension Initiative’’ and other programs?
INS Procedure
Did the INS properly notify the detainees of the charges against them?
Why is this a problem?
What was the ‘hold until cleared’’ policy and what did it result in?
How were detainees treated at the MDC facility?
What was the communications blackout?
Did the government hide where they were kept?
How often were they allowed to call a lawyer?
Comparison with Criminal Detentions
What is the Terry v. Ohio standard for a police stop?
How long can a person be held on a Terry stop?
What is the rule for an INS stop?
Can aliens be arrested and held while the INS sorts out their status?
Can they be held indefinitely before being deported?
What does Zadvydas tell us about how the standard for detention of an alien can change in a terrorist investigation?
Standard for Detention
What standard of proof did the FBI want in detention cases?
the FBI affidavit sought to justify the detention of Al-Maqtari on the basis that the Bureau was ‘‘unable to rule out the possibility that respondent is somehow linked to, or possesses knowledge of, the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.’’
Cheney's 1% Doctrine?
Denmore v. Hyung Joon Kim, 538 U.S. 510 (2003)
[D]ue process requires a ‘‘special justification’’ for physical detention that ‘‘outweighs the individual’s constitutionally protected interest in avoiding physical restraint’’ as well as ‘‘adequate procedural protections.’’ ‘‘There must be a ‘sufficiently compelling’ governmental interest to justify such an action, usually a punitive interest in imprisoning the convicted criminal or a regulatory interest in forestalling danger to the community.’’ The class of persons subject to confinement must be commensurately narrow and the duration of confinement limited accordingly. . . . Finally, procedural due process requires, at a minimum, that a detainee have the benefit of an impartial decisionmaker able to consider particular circumstances on the issue of necessity.
What does this really mean?
United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739 (1987)
What are the standards for detention from United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739 (1987)?
How did the court classify the detention in United States v. Salerno?
Does the Bail Reform Act at issue in US v. Salerno preempt other standards for the detention of terrorist subjects?
Emergency Detention Act
What did the Emergency Detention Act. of 1950 authorize? 
What did the justice department do to implement the act?
Are these still operational?  Has the government built more?
What is the text of the Non-Detention Act that repealed the Emergency Detention Act?
No citizen shall be imprisoned or otherwise detained by the United States except pursuant to an Act of Congress.
Does this really provide much protection?
Material Witnesses
Who can be held as a material witness?
What alternative to incarceration does the statute provide?
What does the statute provide about delay in releasing the witness?
How did the government abuse this in the PENTTBOM investigations?
NB - Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520 (1979), found that material witnesses could be held and treated the same as regular inmates, rejecting the notion that because they were not accused of crimes they were entitled to more humane treatment.
How did the Feds Treat the Material Witness Statute?
What did Mary Jo White, former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, say about preventive detentions?
For example, after acknowledging that the United States has no general preventive detention law, one architect of the post-9/11 detention policy said that ‘‘the material witness statute gives the government effectively the same power. . . . To the extent that it is a suspect involved in terror, you hold them on a material witness warrant, and you get the information until you find out what’s going on.’’
Turkmen v. Ashcroft, 2006 WL 1662663 (E.D.N.Y. June 14, 2006)
A group of post-9/11 immigration detainees, all but one of whom were Muslims of Middle Eastern origin, challenged their detention in part on the Fourth Amendment ground that they were really detained for criminal investigation without probable cause.
How did the court rule on their claims that the immigration charges were pretextual?
What was their equal protection claim?
How did the court rule on their equal protection claim?
Why isn't this unconstitutional ethnic profiling?
Patriot Act
What detention powers does the Patriot Act provide?
providing instead in the USA PATRIOT Act that the INS could hold immigrants for up to seven days before charging them and then hold them while immigration proceedings were pending if the Attorney General certified, at least every six months, that their release would threaten national security.
Bond for Immigration Detentions
What is the standard for opposing bond for immigration cases?
Immigration judges may deny bond for a detained immigrant if the government provides evidence of flight risk or dangerousness.
How were INS lawyers put in an ethical bind on this?
Nevertheless, INS lawyers were apparently ordered to argue the ‘‘no bond’’ position in court without any evidence, using ‘‘boilerplate’’ language.
Consular Rights
What right does the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations give a foreign arrestee?
Was this complied with?
Since this is a reciprocal agreement, why should the US care about whether foreign countries abide by it?
What did Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon, 126 S. Ct. 2669 (2006)
Court held that (1) suppression of evidence in a criminal proceeding is never an appropriate remedy for an Article 36 violation; and (2) federal and state procedural default rules prevent the raising of Article 36 claims that were not made on a timely basis. Although the Court considered the ICJ’s interpretation of Article 36 as deserving respectful consideration, it did not deem it to be legally binding or necessarily persuasive. The Court did not determine whether Article 36 creates an individually-enforceable right. Nor did the Court assess the legal implications of the President’s 2005 memorandum instructing state courts to give effect to the ICJ’s decision in Avena with respect to the 51 Mexican nationals at issue in that case.
The Military Order on Detention
Directs the Secretary of Defense to detain without time limit any noncitizen whom the President has ‘‘reason to believe’’ is a member of Al Qaeda, is involved in international terrorism, or has knowingly harbored such members or terrorists.
Is the Military Order’s detention provision constitutional?
How would you analyze whether this overrides the detention provisions in the Patriot Act?
Iqbal v. Hasty United States Court of Appeals, 490 F.3d 143 (Cir2 2007)
He alleged that he was arrested in the PENTTBOM investigation and detained as a person “of high interest” solely because of his race, religion, and national origin, and not because of any involvement in terrorism.
He brought this suit against his jailers, the Director of the FBI, and the Attorney General for damages based on violations of his constitutional and statutory rights as a result of the conditions of his confinement. Defendants moved to dismiss on grounds of qualified immunity.
Conditions of Confinement
The Plaintiff was not provided with adequate food and lost 40 pounds while in custody. MDC staff called him, among other things, a “terrorist” and a “Muslim killer.” The complaint further alleges that the Plaintiff was brutally beaten by MDC guards on two occasions: upon his transfer to the ADMAX SHU in January 2002 and again in March. Following the March beating, the Plaintiff was denied medical care for two weeks even though he was in excruciating pain. He was also subjected to daily strip and body-cavity searches.
Standards for Qualified Immunity
A defendant will be entitled to qualified immunity if either (1) his actions did not violate clearly established law or (2) it was objectively reasonable for him to believe that his actions did not violate clearly established law.
The Effect of 9/11
Defendants contend that the Government was entitled to take certain actions that might not have been lawful before 9/11 because the Government’s interests assumed special weight in the post-9/11 context. 
Some Defendants contend that, even if the law was clearly established as to the existence of a right claimed to have been violated, it was not clearly established in the extraordinary circumstances of the 9/11 attack and its aftermath.
Some Defendants contend that the post-9/11 context renders their actions objectively reasonable, an argument we do not reach in view of our disposition of their second contention.
Forget 9/11 - What Would the Standard Be?
What if this was a pure prison case?
Would this treatment violate the usual standards for cruel and unusual punishment?
Conscious indifference to the prisoner's welfare?
Why doesn't this 8th Amendment test apply?
What is this a 5th Amendment due process case?
Pretrial detainees have not been convicted of a crime and thus “may not be punished in any manner – neither cruelly and unusually nor otherwise.”
Does 9/11 Categorically Change the Game?
the exigent circumstances of the post-9/11 context do not diminish the Plaintiff’s right not to be needlessly harassed and mistreated in the confines of a prison cell by repeated strip and body-cavity searches. This and other rights, such as the right to be free from use of excessive force and not to be subjected to ethnic or religious discrimination, were all clearly established prior to 9/11, and they remained clearly established even in the aftermath of that horrific event.
Where does Matthews Fit In?
We recognize that in the post-9/11 context the third Mathews factor – the gravity of the Government’s interest – is appropriately accorded more weight than would otherwise be warranted. It might be that the combination of 
(1) the Plaintiff’s interest in avoiding confinement under harsh conditions, 
(2) the risk of an erroneous determination of the need for such confinement, and 
(3) the Government’s interest, accorded added weight in the post-9/11 context, would, on balance, lead to the conclusion that the Government need not have given the Plaintiff notice and a chance for rebuttal before placing him in the ADMAX SHU.
The Due Process Claim
Although we conclude that the Plaintiff has adequately pleaded a violation of a procedural due process right, we also conclude that in this case “officers of reasonable competence could [have] disagree[d],” Malley v. Briggs, 475 U.S. 335, 341 (1986), whether their conduct violated a clearly established procedural due process right. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s right to additional procedures was not clearly established with the level of specificity that is required to defeat a qualified immunity defense.
How this was Driven by the National Security Issue
Prior to the instant case, neither the Supreme Court nor our Court had considered whether the Due Process Clause requires officials to provide ordinary administrative segregation hearings to persons detained under special conditions of confinement until cleared of connection with activities threatening national security.
[The] BOP regulation contains potentially relevant exceptions that undermine certainty as to established requirements of law.
“Administrative detention is to be used only for short periods of time except . . . where there are exceptional circumstances, ordinarily tied to security or complex investigative concerns,”
...inmates are entitled to “an administrative detention order detailing the reasons for placing an inmate in administrative detention . . . provided institutional security is not compromised thereby”
Conditions of Confinement
The court found that plaintiff stated a case that his conditions of confinement constituted punishment, in violation of the standards of Bell v. Wolfish
Since plaintiff has not been convicted of a crime, he can only be detained, not punished
Interference with Religious Practices
Why is it good to make a 1st Amendment Claim when possible?
...Plaintiff alleges that he was not allowed to attend Friday prayers, that prison guards banged on his door when he tried to pray, and that his Koran was routinely confiscated. These allegations suffice to preclude a qualified immunity defense at this stage of the litigation. . . .
Racial and Religious Discrimination
...Plaintiff is alleging is that he was deemed to be “of high interest,” and accordingly was kept in the ADMAX SHU under harsh conditions, solely because of his race, ethnicity, and religion. 
The Plaintiff also alleges that “Defendants specifically targeted [him] for mistreatment because of [his] race, religion, and national origin.” 
These allegations are sufficient to state a claim of animus-based discrimination that any “reasonably competent officer” would understand to have been illegal under prior case law.
Stay Tuned, the United States Supreme Court has accepted cert.
Chapter 25 - Suspending the Great Writ
Habeas Corpus
What does the Latin "habeas corpus" mean?
Where did the right of habeas corpus originate?
Is it provided for in the US constitution?
Does this also make it available for state arrests and detentions?
Habeas Corpus for Administrative Detentions
Quarantine/Isolation
Mental health commitment
Material witnesses
Any other administrative, i.e., not criminal arrest, detention
The Habeas Corpus Petition
What are the basic requirements for habeas corpus?
What is the legal authority to hold the person?
What is the factual basis for falling under the law?
Contesting factual information
If there are issues other than legal issues, the detained person must be allowed to be present.
Suspension of the Writ
Does the constitution provide that the writ can be suspended?
Does it clearly specify who can suspend it?
Why was suspending habeas corpus such an issue in the Civil War?
Merryman, 17 F. Cas. 144 (C.C.D. Md. 1861) 
What had Lincoln done?
Chief Justice Taney:
‘‘I had supposed it to be one of those points in constitutional law upon which there was no difference of Opinion . . . that the privilege of the writ could not be suspended, except by act of congress.’’
What did Lincoln do after this opinion?
Ex Parte Milligan, 71 US 2 (1866)
During the late wicked Rebellion, the temper of the times did not allow that calmness in deliberation and discussion so necessary to a correct conclusion of a purely judicial question. Then, considerations of safety were mingled with the exercise of power; and feelings and interests prevailed which are happily terminated. Now that the public safety is assured, this question, as well as all others, can be discussed and decided without passion or the admixture of any element not required to form a legal judgment.
Are we there yet with 9/11?
The Facts
Where did this happen?
Was Milligan a rebel soldier?
Was he a soldier in the Union Army?
How was he arrested and tried?
Were the civilian courts open?
What is the Real Issue?
Does abolishing the writ do away with the 5th amendment?
‘‘that no person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime unless on presentment by a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."
What does Lincoln accomplish by abolishing the writ?
Why was the Bush administration so opposed to allowing the writ at Guantanamo?
Suspending the Writ
Merryman tells us that the President cannot suspend the writ - how was he authorized to suspend it in this case?
Was this a constitutional delegation of power?
Why did the court say that whether or not the president had the power to suspend the writ, it could not be done in this case?
Why does this also prevent the use of a military tribunal for civilians?
When Can the Writ be Suspended?
If the writ can only be suspended when the courts are not open, what does this imply about the society at that time?
What can congress do in its authorization to suspend the writ?
Why is this called martial law?
Is suspending the writ the real issue, or is it really suspending the constitution?
Why was this an issue in Katrina?
Limiting the Jurisdiction of the Federal Courts to hear Habeas Corpus Petitions
Is Habeas Corpus part of the original jurisdiction of the United States Supreme Court?
If not, then were does the court get the jurisdiction?
If Congress gives the jurisdiction, can it take it back?
Ex parte McCardle
What is your argument that the constitutional provision for the writ implies that the court must be able to review it?
Military Order of November 13, 2001
(1) military tribunals shall have exclusive jurisdiction with respect to offenses by the individual; and
(2) the individual shall not be privileged to seek any remedy or maintain any proceeding, directly or indirectly, or to have any such remedy or proceeding sought on the individual’s behalf, in
(i) any court of the United States, or any State thereof,
(ii) any court of any foreign nation, or
(iii) any international tribunal. . . .
Rasul v. Bush, 124 S.Ct. 2686 (2004)
Are these US citizens or permanent resident aliens?
Are they on US soil?
What does Eisentrager tell us the result should be?
The Status of Guantanamo
What is the key legal inquiry in this case?
What were the insular cases?
What do they tell us that might mitigate Eisentrager?
How did we get Guantanamo?
How long have we held it?
Any evidence we are ever going to let it go?
How does this make the case more like an insular case than like Eisentrager?
What is a Fundamental Constitutional Right?
What rights do the residents of an insular case territory get?
Has Congress imposed any rights in Guantanamo?
What are you left with?
Might habeas corpus apply even when other rights are not available?
"At common law, courts exercised habeas jurisdiction over the claims of aliens detained within sovereign territory of the realm, as well as the claims of persons detained in the so-called ‘‘exempt jurisdictions,’’ where ordinary writs did not run, and all other dominions under the sovereign’s control. . . ."
The Habeas Statute
Congress has granted federal district courts, ‘‘within their respective jurisdictions,’’ the authority to hear applications for habeas corpus by any person who claims to be held ‘‘in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.’’ 28 U.S.C. §§2241(a), (c)(3).
Does this make a fundamental right?
History of Habeas Corpus
‘‘Executive imprisonment has been considered oppressive and lawless since John, at Runnymede, pledged that no free man should be imprisoned, dispossessed, outlawed, or exiled save by the judgment of his peers or by the law of the land. The judges of England developed the writ of habeas corpus largely to preserve these immunities from executive restraint.’’
Why is this important to the case?
Distinguishing  Eisentrager
What was the status of the persons in Eisentrager?
How do the Guantanamo detainees differ?
They are not nationals of countries at war with the United States, and they deny that they have engaged in or plotted acts of aggression against the United States; they have never been afforded access to any tribunal, much less charged with and convicted of wrongdoing; and for more than two years they have been imprisoned in territory over which the United States exercises exclusive jurisdiction and control.
The Legal Core of  Eisentrager
 Eisentrager assumed that a district court in the US did not have jurisdiction to over an order in Germany.
Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Ky., 410 U.S. 484, 495 (1973)
...the prisoner’s presence within the territorial jurisdiction of the district court is not ‘‘an invariable prerequisite’’ to the exercise of district court jurisdiction under the federal habeas statute. Rather, because ‘‘the writ of habeas corpus does not act upon the prisoner who seeks relief, but upon the person who holds him in what is alleged to be unlawful custody,’’ a district court acts ‘‘within [its] respective jurisdiction’’ within the meaning of §2241 as long as ‘‘the custodian can be reached by service of process.’’
Can the Custodian be served for Guantanamo cases?
The Rasul Court's Habeas Corpus Holding
In the end, the answer to the question presented is clear. Petitioners contend that they are being held in federal custody in violation of the laws of the United States.15 No party questions the District Court’s jurisdiction over petitioners’ custodians. Cf. Braden, 410 U.S. at 495. Section 2241, by its terms, requires nothing more. We therefore hold that §2241 confers on the District Court jurisdiction to hear petitioners’ habeas corpus challenges to the legality of their detention at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base.
What about the Alien Tort Claim Statute, 28 USC §1350?
The courts of the United States have traditionally been open to nonresident aliens. And indeed, 28 U.S.C. §1350 explicitly confers the privilege of suing for an actionable ‘‘tort . . . committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States’’ on aliens alone. The fact that petitioners in these cases are being held in military custody is immaterial to the question of the District Court’s jurisdiction over their nonhabeas statutory claims.
How did Kennedy Distinguish Rasul from  Eisentrager?
The facts here are distinguishable from those in Eisentrager in two critical ways, leading to the conclusion that a federal court may entertain the petitions.
First, Guantanamo Bay is in every practical respect a United States territory, and it is one far removed from any hostilities. . . . 
The second critical set of facts is that the detainees at Guantanamo Bay are being held indefinitely, and without benefit of any legal proceeding to determine their status.
How does this Narrow the Majority Opinion?
Indefinite detention without trial or other proceeding presents altogether different considerations. It allows friends and foes alike to remain in detention. It suggests a weaker case of military necessity and much greater alignment with the traditional function of habeas corpus. Perhaps, where detainees are taken from a zone of hostilities, detention without proceedings or trial would be justified by military necessity for a matter of weeks; but as the period of detention stretches from months to years, the case for continued detention to meet military exigencies becomes weaker.
Why is this an important limitation?
The Dissent
What was Scalia worried about in Rasul?
In abandoning the venerable statutory line drawn in Eisentrager, the Court boldly extends the scope of the habeas statute to the four corners of the earth.
Would Rasul apply in Iraq? Afghanistan?
What does Kennedy's concurrence tell us about the facts that may have driven Rasul?
The Detainee Treatment Act of 2005
(e) Except as provided in section 1005 of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, no court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider— 
(1) an application for a writ of habeas corpus filed by or on behalf of an alien detained by the Department of Defense at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba; or 
(2) any other action against the United States or its agents relating to any aspect of the detention by the Department of Defense of an alien at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, who— 
(A) is currently in military custody; or 
(B) has been determined by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in accordance with the procedures set forth in section 1005(e) of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant.
The Second Run at Denying Habeas Corpus to Guantanamo Detainees
(1) No court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider an application for a writ of habeas corpus filed by or on behalf of an alien detained by the United States who has been determined by the United States to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant or is awaiting such determination.
(2) Except as provided in [§1005(e)(2) and (e)(3) of the DTA] no court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider any other action against the United States or its agents relating to any aspect of the detention, transfer, treatment, trial, or conditions of confinement of an alien who is or was detained by the United States and has been determined by the United States to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant or is awaiting such determination.
Boumediene v. Bush, 128 S. Ct. 2229 (2008)
Rasul dealt with the statutory right to habeas corpus
Congress then amended the statute to prevent a statutory right of review
This case deals with whether there is a constitutional right to habeas corpus for these detainees
Limitations:
"We do not address whether the President has authority to detain these petitioners nor do we hold that the writ must issue."
History of the Habeas Corpus Clause
Is there evidence that the founders took habeas corpus seriously?
Where is it located?
Is it part of the Bill of Rights?
Was the Bill of Rights part of the original Constitution?
Why is this significant?
The (Anti-)Suspension Clause
“The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.”
How is rebellion different from war?
Is there a rebellion or an invasion?
Is public safety conjunctive or disjunctive?
Are the conditions met for the suspension clause?
Guantanamo as Sui Generis
"Recent scholarship points to the inherent shortcomings in the historical record. And given the unique status of Guantanamo Bay and the particular dangers of terrorism in the modern age, the common-law courts simply may not have confronted cases with close parallels to this one. We decline, therefore, to infer too much, one way or the other, from the lack of historical evidence on point."
Remember Kennedy's limitation on Rasul - is this the same caveat?
Who Decides Whether the US is Sovereign over a Territory?
If the military captures land, who decides whether we can keep it? (Independent of international law concerns.)
Who does the court say it would defer to to decide whether sovereignty is being exercised in a territory?
We therefore do not question the Government’s position that Cuba, not the United States, maintains sovereignty, in the legal and technical sense of the term, over Guantanamo Bay. But this does not end the analysis. Our cases do not hold it is improper for us to inquire into the objective degree of control the Nation asserts over foreign territory.
The Separation of Powers Doctrine Problem with Guantanamo
The necessary implication of the argument is that by surrendering formal sovereignty over any unincorporated territory to a third party, while at the same time entering into a lease that grants total control over the territory back to the United States, it would be possible for the political branches to govern without legal constraint.
Can sovereignty be abolished?
What if Cuba had tried to assert the sovereignty that we claim we do not have over Guantanamo Bay?
Factors Determining the Reach of the Suspension Clause
(1) the citizenship and status of the detainee and the adequacy of the process through which that status determination was made; 
(2) the nature of the sites where apprehension and then detention took place; and 
(3) the practical obstacles inherent in resolving the prisoner’s entitlement to the writ.
The Status of the Detainees
Did the Eisentrager detainees contest their statues as enemy aliens?
What process had found them to be enemy aliens?
"To rebut the accusations, they were entitled to representation by counsel, allowed to introduce evidence on their own behalf, and permitted to cross examine the prosecution’s witnesses."
Do these Guantanamo detainees accept that they are enemy combatants?
Has there been comparable process to Eisentrager? 
Is Guantanamo Like the Eisentrager Prison in Occupied Germany?
Unlike its present control over the naval station, the United States’ control over the prison in Germany was neither absolute nor indefinite. Like all parts of occupied Germany, the prison was under the jurisdiction of the combined Allied Forces. The United States was therefore answerable to its Allies for all activities occurring there. The Court’s holding in Eisentrager was thus consistent with the Insular Cases, where it had held there was no need to extend full constitutional protections to territories the United States did not intend to govern indefinitely.
Would Complying with Habeas Corpus Requirements be Impractical?
No Cuban court has jurisdiction over American military personnel at Guantanamo or the enemy combatants detained there. While obligated to abide by the terms of the lease, the United States is, for all practical purposes, answerable to no other sovereign for its acts on the base. Were that not the case, or if the detention facility were located in an active theater of war, arguments that issuing the writ would be “impracticable or anomalous” would have more weight.
Is the Writ Suspended?
We hold that Art. I, §9, cl. 2, of the Constitution has full effect at Guantanamo Bay. If the privilege of habeas corpus is to be denied to the detainees now before us, Congress must act in accordance with the requirements of the Suspension Clause. Cf. Hamdi, 542 U.S., at 564 (SCALIA, J., dissenting) (“[I]ndefinite imprisonment on reasonable suspicion is not an available option of treatment for those accused of aiding the enemy, absent a suspension of the writ”). This Court may not impose a de facto suspension by abstaining from these controversies.
Can Congress Remove the Court's Jurisdiction over Habeas Corpus?
What would be the effect of allowing Congress to remove jurisdiction for habeas corpus?
What does the administration say is a substitute for habeas corpus?
The Government submits there has been compliance with the Suspension Clause because the DTA review process in the Court of Appeals, see DTA §1005(e), provides an adequate substitute.
What about separation of powers?
Did Congress Intend to Create an Alternative to Habeas Corpus?
To the extent any doubt remains about Congress’ intent, the legislative history confirms what the plain text strongly suggests: In passing the DTA Congress did not intend to create a process that differs from traditional habeas corpus process in name only. It intended to create a more limited procedure.
The Core of Habeas Corpus
We do consider it uncontroversial, however, that the privilege of habeas corpus entitles the prisoner to a meaningful opportunity to demonstrate that he is being held pursuant to “the erroneous application or interpretation” of relevant law.
And the habeas court must have the power to order the conditional release of an individual unlawfully detained – though release need not be the exclusive remedy and is not the appropriate one in every case in which the writ is granted.
Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976) and Habeas Corpus
The idea that the necessary scope of habeas review in part depends upon the rigor of any earlier proceedings accords with our test for procedural adequacy in the due process context.
See Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 335 (1976) (noting that the Due Process Clause requires an assessment of, inter alia, “the risk of an erroneous deprivation of [a liberty interest;] and the probable value, if any, of additional or substitute procedural safeguards”).
Detention by Executive Order
Where a person is detained by executive order, rather than, say, after being tried and convicted in a court, the need for collateral review is most pressing. A criminal conviction in the usual course occurs after a judicial hearing before a tribunal disinterested in the outcome and committed to procedures designed to ensure its own independence. These dynamics are not inherent in executive detention orders or executive review procedures.
Why does this make habeas corpus more important?
Judicial Review under the DTA
The DTA enables petitioners to request “review” of their CSRT determination in the Court of Appeals, but the “Scope of Review” provision confines the Court of Appeals’ role to reviewing whether the CSRT followed the “standards and procedures” issued by the Department of Defense and assessing whether those “standards and procedures” are lawful. 
Among these standards is “the requirement that the conclusion of the Tribunal be supported by a preponderance of the evidence . . . allowing a rebuttable presumption in favor of the Government’s evidence.”
On its face the statute allows the Court of Appeals to consider no evidence outside the CSRT record.
Does the DTA Give the Reviewing Court Sufficient Authority?
What does this standard of review prevent the court from doing?
Has the detainee had an opportunity to fully develop the record during the administrative proceeding justifying detention?
Is this an adequate substitute for habeas corpus?
What about Exhaustion of Remedies?
Must the  CSRT determination be appealed to Circuit court before the District court can hear the writ?
The cases before us, however, do not involve detainees who have been held for a short period of time while awaiting their CSRT determinations. Were that the case, or were it probable that the Court of Appeals could complete a prompt review of their applications, the case for requiring temporary abstention or exhaustion of alternative remedies would be much stronger. The detainees in these cases are entitled to a prompt habeas corpus hearing.
Are the DTA and CSRT Processes Constitutional?
Our holding with regard to exhaustion should not be read to imply that a habeas court should intervene the moment an enemy combatant steps foot in a territory where the writ runs. The Executive is entitled to a reasonable period of time to determine a detainee’s status before a court entertains that detainee’s habeas corpus petition. The CSRT process is the mechanism Congress and the President set up to deal with these issues. Except in cases of undue delay, federal courts should refrain from entertaining an enemy combatant’s habeas corpus petition at least until after the Department, acting via the CSRT, has had a chance to review his status.
Why Should Congress and the Executive Care about the History of Habeas Corpus?
Security depends upon a sophisticated intelligence apparatus and the ability of our Armed Forces to act and to interdict. There are further considerations, however. Security subsists, too, in fidelity to freedom’s first principles. Chief among these are freedom from arbitrary and unlawful restraint and the personal liberty that is secured by adherence to the separation of powers. It is from these principles that the judicial authority to consider petitions for habeas corpus relief derives.
The Concurrence: Is this Precipitous Action?
After six years of sustained executive detentions in Guantanamo, subject to habeas jurisdiction but without any actual habeas scrutiny, today’s decision is no judicial victory, but an act of perseverance in trying to make habeas review, and the obligation of the courts to provide it, mean something of value both to prisoners and to the Nation.
The Dissent
Today the Court strikes down as inadequate the most generous set of procedural protections ever afforded aliens detained by this country as enemy combatants. Today the Court strikes down as inadequate the most generous set of procedural protections ever afforded aliens detained by this country as enemy combatants. Today the Court strikes down as inadequate the most generous set of procedural protections ever afforded aliens detained by this country as enemy combatants.
Is this true, even looking at Eisentrager? 
What about the Delay?
If the majority were truly concerned about delay, it would have required petitioners to use the DTA process that has been available to them for 2 1/2 years, with its Article III review in the D.C. Circuit. That system might well have provided petitioners all the relief to which they are entitled long before the Court’s newly installed habeas review could hope to do so.
Why didn't petitioners do this?
Will the World End?
The game of bait-and-switch that today’s opinion plays upon the Nation’s Commander in Chief will make the war harder on us. It will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed. That consequence would be tolerable if necessary to preserve a time-honored legal principle vital to our constitutional Republic. But it is this Court’s blatant abandonment of such a principle that produces the decision today.
The Rejection of Exterritorial Reach
[A]ll available historical evidence points to the conclusion that the writ would not have been available at common law for aliens captured and held outside the sovereign territory of the Crown.
Why is not responsive to majority opinion?
How does the majority limit the opinion as regards general exterritorial reach?
Munaf v. Geren, 128 S. Ct. 2207 (2008)
Are these US citizens?
Where are they being held?
Who is holding them?
Does habeas corpus apply?
Do they want to be released?
Why not?
Why does this complicate a habeas corpus petition?
The Sovereign Nation Conflict
Who wants to prosecute the petitioners?
Do Americans get US due process in foreign courts?
“When an American citizen commits a crime in a foreign country he cannot complain if required to submit to such modes of trial and to such punishment as the laws of that country may prescribe for its own people.”
Can habeas corpus be used to dodge foreign prosecution?
Freedom from Unlawful Transfer
The habeas petitioners nonetheless argue that the Due Process Clause includes a “[f]reedom from unlawful transfer” that is “protected wherever the government seizes a citizen.” 
We disagree. Not only have we long recognized the principle that a nation state reigns sovereign within its own territory, we have twice applied that principle to reject claims that the Constitution precludes the Executive from transferring a prisoner to a foreign country for prosecution in an allegedly unconstitutional trial.
Does Torture Matter?
Petitioners contend that these general principles are trumped in their cases because their transfer to Iraqi custody is likely to result in torture. . . . Such allegations are of course a matter of serious concern, but in the present context that concern is to be addressed by the political branches, not the judiciary.
Who gets to make the transfer decision?
The Executive Branch may, of course, decline to surrender a detainee for many reasons, including humanitarian ones.
The Concurrence: Release is not the Only Remedy Under Habeas Corpus
And although the Court points out that habeas is aimed at securing release, not protective detention, habeas would not be the only avenue open to an objecting prisoner; “where federally protected rights [are threatened], it has been the rule from the beginning that courts will be alert to adjust their remedies so as to grant the necessary relief,” Bell v. Hood, 327 U.S. 678, 684 (1946).
Class Evals
Boumediene v. Bush United States, 579 F. Supp. 2d 191 (DDC 2008)
This is the decision on remand from the United States Supreme Court.
[T]he Government bears the burden of proving “by a preponderance of the evidence, the lawfulness of the petitioner’s detention.”
The Government argues that petitioners are lawfully detained because they are “enemy combatants,” who can be held pursuant to the Authorization for the Use of Military Force and the President’s powers as Commander in Chief.
Facts
Where were these men arrested and by whom?
Bosnia - how far is this from Iraq or Afghanistan?
Bosnian authorities
Were the original charges against them substantiated?
What are the current charges?
The Plan to Travel to Afghanistan to Engage U.S. and Allied Forces
Belkacem Bensayah’s Role as an al-Qaida Facilitator
What is an Enemy Combatant?
An “enemy combatant” is an individual who was part of or supporting Taliban or al Qaeda forces, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners. This includes any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported hostilities in aid of enemy armed forces.
The Plan to Travel to Afghanistan to Engage U.S. and Allied Forces
Petitioners contend that the Government has not shown by a preponderance of the evidence that any of the petitioners planned to travel to Afghanistan to engage U.S. forces, and, even if the Government had shown that petitioners had such a plan, a mere plan, unaccompanied by any concrete acts, is not – as a matter of law – “supporting” al-Qaida within the meaning of the Court’s definition of “enemy combatant.”
The Government's Evidence
the Government relies exclusively on the information contained in a classified document from an unnamed source. This source is the only evidence in the record directly supporting each detainee’s alleged knowledge of, or commitment to, this supposed plan. And while the Government has provided some information about the source’s credibility and reliability, it has not provided the Court with enough information to adequately evaluate the credibility and reliability of this source’s information.
The Standard for the Evidence: Parhat v. Gates, 532 F.3d 834 (D.C. Cir. 2008) 
“[T]he factfinder must evaluate the raw evidence, finding it to be sufficiently reliable and sufficiently probative to demonstrate the truth of the asserted proposition with the requisite degree of certainty.”
For example, the Court has no knowledge as to the circumstances under which the source obtained the information as to each petitioner’s alleged knowledge and intentions.
What is the result of applying this standard to Boumediene?
Belkacem Bensayah’s Role as an al-Qaida Facilitator
...the Government depends on the same intelligence information described above, but also puts forth a series of other intelligence reports based on a variety of sources and evidence, which it contends corroborate the facilitator allegation.
For all of those reasons and more, the Court concludes that the Government has established by a preponderance of the evidence that it is more likely than not Mr. Bensayah not only planned to take up arms against the United States but also facilitate the travel of unnamed others to do the same.
Chapter 26 - Military Detention
Alien Enemy Act
50 U.S.C. §21 (2000)
Whenever there is a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government, or any invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States by any foreign nation or government, and the President makes public proclamation of the event, all natives, citizens, denizens, or subjects of the hostile nation or government, being of the age of fourteen years and upward, who shall be within the United States and not actually naturalized, shall be liable to be apprehended, restrained, secured, and removed as alien enemies.
Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 (1944)
What was ordered?
What was the role of detention?
What if they were on the East Coast?
What was the rationale for why they posed a danger to the US?
What happened to the detainee's property?
Justice Black
Our task would be simple, our duty clear, were this a case involving the imprisonment of a loyal citizen in a concentration camp because of racial prejudice. Regardless of the true nature of the assembly and relocation centers— and we deem it unjustifiable to call them concentration camps with all the ugly connotations that term implies—we are dealing specifically with nothing but an exclusion order.
We uphold the exclusion order as of the time it was made and when the petitioner violated it. In doing so, we are not unmindful of the hardships imposed by it upon a large group of American citizens. But hardships are part of war, and war is an aggregation of hardships.
Justice Frankfurter
Therefore, the validity of action under the war power must be judged wholly in the context of war. That action is not to be stigmatized as lawless because like action in times of peace would be lawless. To talk about a military order that expresses an allowable judgment of war needs by those entrusted with the duty of conducting war as ‘‘an unconstitutional order’’ is to suffuse a part of the Constitution with an atmosphere of unconstitutionality. The respective spheres of action of military authorities and of judges are of course very different. But within their sphere, military authorities are no more outside the bounds of obedience to the Constitution than are judges within theirs.
Justice Murphy - Dissenting
The judicial test of whether the Government, on a plea of military necessity, can validly deprive an individual of any of his constitutional rights is whether the deprivation is reasonably related to a public danger that is so ‘‘immediate, imminent, and impending’’ as not to admit of delay and not to permit the intervention of ordinary constitutional processes to alleviate the danger. Civilian Exclusion Order No. 34, banishing from a prescribed area of the Pacific Coast ‘‘all persons of Japanese ancestry, both alien and non-alien,’’ clearly does not meet that test.
Justice Jackson - Dissenting
[T]he ‘‘law’’ which this prisoner is convicted of disregarding is not found in an act of Congress, but in a military order. Neither the Act of Congress nor the Executive Order of the President, nor both together, would afford a basis for this conviction. It rests on the orders of General DeWitt. And it is said that if the military commander had reasonable military grounds for promulgating the orders, they are constitutional and become law, and the Court is required to enforce them. There are several reasons why I cannot subscribe to this doctrine.
Implications of the Ruling
Has it subsequently been overruled by the United States Supreme Court?
Do you think it could happen again?
Ex parte Mitsuye Endo, 323 U.S. 283 (1944): Explaining the Camps
"When compulsory evacuation from the West Coast was decided upon, plans for taking care of the evacuees after their detention in the Assembly Centers, to which they were initially removed, remained to be determined. On April 7, 1942, the Director of the Authority held a conference in Salt Lake City with various state and federal officials including the Governors of the inter-mountain states. 'Strong opposition was expressed to any type of unsupervised relocation and some of the Governors refused to be responsible for maintenance of law and order unless evacuees brought into their States were kept under constant military surveillance.' As stated by General De Witt in his report to the Chief of Staff: 'Essentially, military necessity required only that the Japanese population be removed from the coastal area and dispersed in the interior, where the danger of action in concert during any attempted enemy raids along the coast, or in advance thereof as preparation for a full scale attack, would be eliminated. That the evacuation program necessarily and ultimately developed into one of complete Federal supervision, was due primarily to the fact that the interior states would not accept an uncontrolled Japanese migration.'"
Ex parte Mitsuye Endo, 323 U.S. 283 (1944) 
Endo is a fascinating case that explains the basis for the use of internment camps and the system for granting leave to detained persons.
The court found in Endo that once the government had decided that a detained individual was a loyal citizen and eligible for release, their statutory authority to detain was ended and the person must be released.
Ex parte Quirin, 317 U.S. 1 (1942)
Who are the defendants?
What are they accused of and where were they apprehended?
Are any US citizens?
How are they being tried?
What are they appealing in this case?
Why are Military Tribunals Being Used?
By the Articles of War, 10 U.S.C. §§1471-1593, Congress has provided rules for the government of the Army. . . . But the Articles also recognize the ‘‘military commission’’ appointed by military command as an appropriate tribunal for the trial and punishment of offenses against the law of war not ordinarily tried by court martial.
By the Articles of War, and especially Article 15, Congress has explicitly provided, so far as it may constitutionally do so, that military tribunals shall have jurisdiction to try offenders or offenses against the law of war in appropriate cases.
What Makes an Offense Against the Law Of War?
We may assume that there are acts regarded in other countries, or by some writers on international law, as offenses against the law of war which would not be triable by military tribunal here, either because they are not recognized by our courts as violations of the law of war or because they are of that class of offenses constitutionally triable only by a jury. It was upon such grounds that the Court denied the right to proceed by military tribunal in Ex parte Milligan, supra. But as we shall show, these petitioners were charged with an offense against the law of war which the Constitution does not require to be tried by jury.
Lawful and Unlawful Combatants
Lawful combatants are subject to capture and detention as prisoners of war by opposing military forces. Unlawful combatants are likewise subject to capture and detention, but in addition they are subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals for acts which render their belligerency unlawful.
Examples of Unlawful Combatants
The spy who secretly and without uniform passes the military lines of a belligerent in time of war, seeking to gather military information and communicate it to the enemy, or an enemy combatant who without uniform comes secretly through the lines for the purpose of waging war by destruction of life or property, are familiar examples of belligerents who are generally deemed not to be entitled to the status of prisoners of war, but to be offenders against the law of war subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals. 
The Charges
Specification 1 states that petitioners ‘‘being enemies of the United States and acting for . . . the German Reich, a belligerent enemy nation, secretly and covertly passed, in civilian dress, contrary to the law of war, through the military and naval lines and defenses of the United States . . . and went behind such lines, contrary to the law of war, in civilian dress . . . for the purpose of committing . . . hostile acts, and, in particular, to destroy certain war industries, war utilities and war materials within the United States.’’
5th and 6th Amendment Claims
Presentment by a grand jury and trial by a jury... But they were procedures unknown to military tribunals, which are not courts in the sense of the Judiciary Article... 
...[W]e must conclude that §2 of Article III and the Fifth and Sixth Amendments cannot be taken to have extended the right to demand a jury to trials by military commission, or to have required that offenses against the law of war not triable by jury at common law be tried only in the civil courts.
What about Milligan?
...the Court concluded that Milligan, not being a part of or associated with the armed forces of the enemy, was a non-belligerent, not subject to the law of war save as—in circumstances found not there to be present and not involved here—martial law might be constitutionally established.

The Holding
We have no occasion now to define with meticulous care the ultimate boundaries of the jurisdiction of military tribunals to try persons according to the law of war. It is enough that petitioners here, upon the conceded facts, were plainly within those boundaries, and were held in good faith for trial by military commission, charged with being enemies who, with the purpose of destroying war materials and utilities, entered or after entry remained in our territory without uniform—an offense against the law of war.
Subsequent History?
What happened to defendants BEFORE the final court opinion was handed down?
Was the court anticipating this?
Might it have changed their views?
Is Quirin Useful Precedent in a War on Terror?
Think about our discussions about the problems of deciding when an imperfect war ends and who is a combatant. 
What problems does this pose in figuring out what Quirin means in the war on terror?
Why was it easy to decide they were enemy combatants?
Hamdi v. Rumsfeld,  542 U.S. 507 (2004)
Where was Hamdi arrested?
Where was Hamdi born?
When can the government detain a citizen under the military order?
NB - one of the Quirin spies was a US citizen
The Governments' Factual Case
The legal authority is the AUMF
 The first factual basis is that he was in Afghanistan, and that is enough.
Did the court think that fit the AUMF?
Second, that the court should defer to the president's decision to detain.
The Mathews Test: Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976)
Mathews dictates that the process due in any given instance is determined by weighing ‘‘the private interest that will be affected by the official action’’ against the Government’s asserted interest, ‘‘including the function involved’’ and the burdens the Government would face in providing greater process. 
The Mathews calculus then contemplates a judicious balancing of these concerns, through an analysis of ‘‘the risk of an erroneous deprivation’’ of the private interest if the process were reduced and the ‘‘probable value, if any, of additional or substitute safeguards.’
Applying Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976)
‘‘In our society liberty is the norm,’’ and detention without trial ‘‘is the carefully limited exception.’’ [United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739 (1987)]
On the other side of the scale are the weighty and sensitive governmental interests in ensuring that those who have in fact fought with the enemy during a war do not return to battle against the United States.
The Holding
We therefore hold that a citizen-detainee seeking to challenge his classification as an enemy combatant must receive notice of the factual basis for his classification, and a fair opportunity to rebut the Government’s factual assertions before a neutral decisionmaker.
At the same time, the exigencies of the circumstances may demand that, aside from these core elements, enemy combatant proceedings may be tailored to alleviate their uncommon potential to burden the Executive at a time of ongoing military conflict. ... Thus, once the Government puts forth credible evidence that the habeas petitioner meets the enemy combatant criteria, the onus could shift to the petitioner to rebut that evidence with more persuasive evidence that he falls outside the criteria.
Limits to the Holding to Protect the Government's Interests
The parties agree that initial captures on the battlefield need not receive the process we have discussed here; that process is due only when the determination is made to continue to hold those who have been seized. The Government has made clear in its briefing that documentation regarding battlefield detainees already is kept in the ordinary course of military affairs. Any factfinding imposition created by requiring a knowledgeable affiant to summarize these records to an independent tribunal is a minimal one. Likewise, arguments that military officers ought not have to wage war under the threat of litigation lose much of their steam when factual disputes at enemy-combatant hearings are limited to the alleged combatant’s acts.
The Invitation to Congress
Likewise, we have made clear that, unless Congress acts to suspend it, the Great Writ of habeas corpus allows the Judicial Branch to play a necessary role in maintaining this delicate balance of governance, serving as an important judicial check on the Executive’s discretion in the realm of detentions.
When does Right to Counsel Vest?
Hamdi asks us to hold that the Fourth Circuit also erred by denying him immediate access to counsel upon his detention and by disposing of the case without permitting him to meet with an attorney. Since our grant of certiorari in this case, Hamdi has been appointed counsel, with whom he has met for consultation purposes on several occasions, and with whom he is now being granted unmonitored meetings. He unquestionably has the right to access to counsel in connection with the proceedings on remand. No further consideration of this issue is necessary at this stage of the case.
Souter and Ginsberg
Why do they say the government cannot use the AUMF to hold Hamdi?
By holding him incommunicado, however, the Government obviously has not been treating him as a prisoner of war, and in fact the Government claims that no Taliban detainee is entitled to prisoner of war status. This treatment appears to be a violation of the Geneva Convention provision that even in cases of doubt, captives are entitled to be treated as prisoners of war ‘‘until such time as their status has been determined by a competent tribunal.’’
Scalia
How did Scalia distinguish Quirin from Hamdi?
What does Scalia think of the claims by the President that he has the authority to try citizens held on US soil, with a military tribunal?
What is only basis for denying habeas corpus to a citizen on US soil that Scalia would accept?
Given this, why was Scalia so skeptical about Rasul?
Johnson v. Eisentrager, 339 U.S. 763 (1950)
Why were defendant's just treated as prisoners of war?
U.S. armed forces captured 21 German nationals in service of German armed forces in China. A U.S. military commission sitting in China tried and convicted them of violating laws of war, namely, engaging in, permitting, or ordering continued military activity against the United States after the surrender of Germany and before the surrender of Japan.
This is an important case to read, but we have already seen it in other cases.