No. 19-7460
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: attorney-general-discretion civil-rights constitutional-review constitutional-rights-4th-amendment due-process fisa-surveillance foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act national-security standing surveillance terrorism terrorism-conspiracy warrantless-search warrantless-surveillance
Key Terms:
Arbitration FourthAmendment Privacy
Arbitration FourthAmendment Privacy
Latest Conference:
2020-02-28
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether FISA's emergency provision is unconstitutional
Question Presented (from Petition)
ISSUES PRESENTED I. Whether FISA’s emergency provision, 50 U.S.C. §1805(e), which allows warrantless surveillance of American citizens on America soil for up to seven days based on the unilateral and unreviewable judgment of the Attorney General, is unconstitutional. II. Whether, in a prosecution for conspiracy to commit an act of terrorism transcending national boundaries, 18 U.S.C. §2332b, the Defendant must specifically intend that someone overseas engage in “conduct” and whether the “conduct” element can be satisfied by proof of “communication of some sort.” i
Docket Entries
2020-03-02
Petition DENIED.
2020-02-13
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/28/2020.
2020-02-04
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2020-01-23
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 27, 2020)
Attorneys
David Wright
Michael L. Tumposky — Hedges & Tumposky, LLP, Petitioner
Michael L. Tumposky — Hedges & Tumposky, LLP, Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent