National Security

Featured

U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2023
Outside Federal Bureau of Investigation Headquarters

National Security

FBI v. Fikre

Whether the government can overcome the voluntary cessation exception to mootness by removing an individual from the No Fly List when the government has not repudiated its decision to place him on the List and remains free to return him to the List for the same reasons and using the same procedures he alleges were unlawful.
Fbi V. Fikre. Explore Case.
Florida
Nov 2023
Students for Justice in Palestine at the University of Florida v. Raymond Rodrigues

National Security

+2 Ƶ

Students for Justice in Palestine at the University of Florida v. Raymond Rodrigues

The University of Florida chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine filed a lawsuit on November 16, 2023, challenging the Chancellor of the State University System of Florida’s order to state universities to deactivate the student group. This order threatens the students’ constitutionally-protected right to free speech and association in violation of the First Amendment. The Ƶand its partners are seeking a preliminary injunction that would bar the Chancellor and the University of Florida from deactivating the UF SJP.
Students For Justice In Palestine At The University Of Florida V. Raymond Rodrigues. Explore Case.
U.S. Supreme Court
Apr 2022
FBI v. Fazaga Plaintiffs

National Security

+2 Ƶ

FBI v. Fazaga

In a case scheduled to be argued before the U.S. Supreme Court on November 8, 2021, three Muslim Americans are challenging the FBI’s secret spying on them and their communities based on their religion, in violation of the Constitution and federal law. In what will likely be a landmark case, the plaintiffs — Yassir Fazaga, Ali Uddin Malik, and Yasser Abdelrahim — insist that the FBI cannot escape accountability for violating their religious freedom by invoking “state secrets.” The plaintiffs are represented by the Center for Immigration Law and Policy at UCLA School of Law, the Ƶof Southern California, the Ƶ, the Council for American Islamic Relations, and the law firm of Hadsell Stormer Renick & Dai.
Fbi V. Fazaga. Explore Case.
U.S. Supreme Court
Jul 2021
Trump Declaring National Emergency

National Security

Immigrants' Rights

Sierra Club v. Trump — Challenge to Trump’s National Emergency Declaration to Construct a Border Wall

In February 2019, the Ƶfiled a lawsuit challenging President Trump’s emergency powers declaration to secure funds to build a wall along the southern border. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of the Sierra Club and the Southern Border Communities Coalition. The lawsuit argues that the president is usurping Congress’s appropriations power and threatening the clearly defined separation of powers inscribed in the Constitution. On January 20, 2021, President Biden halted further border wall construction. Litigation in this and subsequent related challenges has been paused or deadlines extended while the ACLU’s clients and the Biden administration determine next steps.
Sierra Club V. Trump — Challenge To Trump’s National Emergency Declaration To Construct A Border Wall. Explore Case.
Indiana
Oct 2016
Exodus Refugee Immigration, Inc. v. Mike Pence, et al

National Security

Immigrants' Rights

Exodus Refugee Immigration, Inc. v. Mike Pence, et al

The Ƶ and the Ƶof Indiana, on behalf of Exodus Refugee Immigration, filed suit against Governor Mike Pence and the secretary of the Indiana Family and Social Services Administration to stop attempts to suspend resettlement of Syrian refugees, claiming the governor’s actions violate the United States Constitution and federal law.
Exodus Refugee Immigration, Inc. V. Mike Pence, Et Al. Explore Case.

All Cases

155 National Security Cases

NSA Building
Court Case
Sep 2014

National Security

Ƶv. NSA - Challenge to Warrantless Wiretapping

In 2006, in the first federal challenge ever argued against the NSA's warrantless wiretapping program, the Ƶdefeated the Bush administration when a district court declared the program unconstitutional. But in July 2007, the 6th Circuit overturned that decision. The Ƶasked the Supreme Court of the United States to consider the ruling, but in February 2008, the Court declined to review the challenge.
Explore case
Aclu V. Nsa - Challenge To Warrantless Wiretapping. Explore Case.
Court Case
Sep 2014
NSA Building

National Security

Ƶv. NSA - Challenge to Warrantless Wiretapping

In 2006, in the first federal challenge ever argued against the NSA's warrantless wiretapping program, the Ƶdefeated the Bush administration when a district court declared the program unconstitutional. But in July 2007, the 6th Circuit overturned that decision. The Ƶasked the Supreme Court of the United States to consider the ruling, but in February 2008, the Court declined to review the challenge.
Aclu V. Nsa - Challenge To Warrantless Wiretapping. Explore Case.
Sign that reads "NO ENTRY"
California
Jul 2014

National Security

Muhanna v. USCIS - Challenge to Government Program Denying Citizenship and Green Cards Based on Unfounded 'National Security Concerns'

The Ƶof Southern California and the ACLU, along with the Jones Day and Stacy Tolchin law firms, filed a lawsuit in July 2014 challenging a federal government program used to deny or delay thousands of law-abiding people - many of them from Muslim-majority countries - citizenship, green cards, and visas on counterterrorism grounds. The program is illegal and unconstitutional, was adopted without any congressional approval or public comment, and violates the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of due process, as the aspiring Americans whose applications are denied under the program are not told why or given a meaningful opportunity to clear their names. In response to the lawsuit, the government promptly acted upon the applications of all of the plaintiffs, approving three of them, and the case was resolved.
Explore case
Muhanna V. Uscis - Challenge To Government Program Denying Citizenship And Green Cards Based On Unfounded 'national Security Concerns'. Explore Case.
California
Jul 2014
Sign that reads "NO ENTRY"

National Security

Muhanna v. USCIS - Challenge to Government Program Denying Citizenship and Green Cards Based on Unfounded 'National Security Concerns'

The Ƶof Southern California and the ACLU, along with the Jones Day and Stacy Tolchin law firms, filed a lawsuit in July 2014 challenging a federal government program used to deny or delay thousands of law-abiding people - many of them from Muslim-majority countries - citizenship, green cards, and visas on counterterrorism grounds. The program is illegal and unconstitutional, was adopted without any congressional approval or public comment, and violates the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of due process, as the aspiring Americans whose applications are denied under the program are not told why or given a meaningful opportunity to clear their names. In response to the lawsuit, the government promptly acted upon the applications of all of the plaintiffs, approving three of them, and the case was resolved.
Muhanna V. Uscis - Challenge To Government Program Denying Citizenship And Green Cards Based On Unfounded 'national Security Concerns'. Explore Case.
Domestic Surveillance
California
Jul 2014

National Security

Gill v. DOJ – Challenge to Government's Suspicious Activity Reporting Program

The Ƶof California, the ACLU, Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Asian Law Caucus, and the law firm Bingham McCutchen have filed a lawsuit challenging the federal government's Suspicious Activity Reporting program — a vast expansion of the federal government's domestic intelligence network. The SAR program supposedly facilitates the collection and sharing of information about activity that appears suspicious, but in practice it targets First Amendment-protected activity, encourages racial and religious profiling, and violates federal law. The plaintiffs are five U.S. citizens whose information has been entered into counterterrorism databases for engaging in lawful conduct, and who have been subject to unwarranted law enforcement and scrutiny. The lawsuit was filed in July 2014 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. In March 2017, the District Court granted the government’s motion for summary judgment, upholding the SAR program’s standard for data collection. We are appealing that ruling to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Explore case
Gill V. Doj – Challenge To Government's Suspicious Activity Reporting Program. Explore Case.
California
Jul 2014
Domestic Surveillance

National Security

Gill v. DOJ – Challenge to Government's Suspicious Activity Reporting Program

The Ƶof California, the ACLU, Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Asian Law Caucus, and the law firm Bingham McCutchen have filed a lawsuit challenging the federal government's Suspicious Activity Reporting program — a vast expansion of the federal government's domestic intelligence network. The SAR program supposedly facilitates the collection and sharing of information about activity that appears suspicious, but in practice it targets First Amendment-protected activity, encourages racial and religious profiling, and violates federal law. The plaintiffs are five U.S. citizens whose information has been entered into counterterrorism databases for engaging in lawful conduct, and who have been subject to unwarranted law enforcement and scrutiny. The lawsuit was filed in July 2014 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. In March 2017, the District Court granted the government’s motion for summary judgment, upholding the SAR program’s standard for data collection. We are appealing that ruling to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Gill V. Doj – Challenge To Government's Suspicious Activity Reporting Program. Explore Case.
Photographs of Abdulrahman Al-Aulaqi courtesy of the Al-Aulaqi family.
Court Case
Jun 2014

National Security

Al-Aulaqi v. Panetta - Constitutional Challenge to Killing of Three U.S. Citizens

The Ƶ and the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) filed a lawsuit in 2012 challenging the government’s targeted killing of three U.S. citizens in drone strikes far from any armed conflict zone. Oral argument was held in July 2013 in Washington, and the court dismissed the case in April 2014.
Explore case
Al-aulaqi V. Panetta - Constitutional Challenge To Killing Of Three U.s. Citizens. Explore Case.
Court Case
Jun 2014
Photographs of Abdulrahman Al-Aulaqi courtesy of the Al-Aulaqi family.

National Security

Al-Aulaqi v. Panetta - Constitutional Challenge to Killing of Three U.S. Citizens

The Ƶ and the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) filed a lawsuit in 2012 challenging the government’s targeted killing of three U.S. citizens in drone strikes far from any armed conflict zone. Oral argument was held in July 2013 in Washington, and the court dismissed the case in April 2014.
Al-aulaqi V. Panetta - Constitutional Challenge To Killing Of Three U.s. Citizens. Explore Case.
FBI
Court Case
Oct 2013

National Security

+4 Ƶ

Ƶv. FBI - eGuardian FOIA Lawsuit

Government documents obtained by the Ƶshow that nationwide programs that collect so-called Suspicious Activity Reports provide inadequate privacy safeguards and guidance on the definition of suspicious activity, leading to violations of Americans' First Amendment and privacy rights, and to racial and religious profiling.
Explore case
Aclu V. Fbi - Eguardian Foia Lawsuit. Explore Case.
Court Case
Oct 2013
FBI

National Security

+4 Ƶ

Ƶv. FBI - eGuardian FOIA Lawsuit

Government documents obtained by the Ƶshow that nationwide programs that collect so-called Suspicious Activity Reports provide inadequate privacy safeguards and guidance on the definition of suspicious activity, leading to violations of Americans' First Amendment and privacy rights, and to racial and religious profiling.
Aclu V. Fbi - Eguardian Foia Lawsuit. Explore Case.
1415
16
1718...