Earlier this week, the Supreme Court denied Mohammed Jawad’s petition for certiorari.
Latest in Interrogation: Interrogation Abuses: Civil Liability
In late 2002, Afghan officials arrested Mohammed Jawad and transferred him to American officials. During his six-year stay at Guantanamo, Jawad alleges that he was tortured. Upon being released from federal custody and repatriated to Afghanistan, Jawad sued the government in 2014. Last year on Lawfare, Helen Klein Murillo described the D.C.
It looks like the DOJ is going to invoke the state secrets privilege after all in the latest CIA torture suit brought by former detainees, marking the first time that the Trump administration will use this powerful legal tool. But in an interesting variation on the typical post-9/11 state secrets cases, this time it is the defendants rather than the plaintiffs who seek to introduce information that the government alleges may harm national security.
The jurisdictional and procedural barriers are high for plaintiffs seeking to hold individuals liable for post-9/11 U.S. counterterrorism programs. But a torture suit brought by alien plaintiffs against two American CIA contractors seems likely to reach a trial on the merits after surviving a second motion to dismiss last Friday.
In a decision handed down today, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated and remanded a district court decision dimissing a tort suit against CACI Premier Technology Inc., a contractor at the Abu Ghraib prison; the district court had ruled that the suit presented a political question. The lawsuit, Al Shimari v. CACI Premier Technology et al., alleges that the company engaged in torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment of the four plaintiffs during their imprisonment in Abu Ghraib.
Last week, the Fourth Circuit heard an appeal in Al Shimari v. CACI Premier Technology, Inc. Steve Vladeck earlier flagged the case at Just Security, but for those who haven't read his post: Al Shimari alleges that a military contractor was partly responsible for torturing him at Abu Ghraib.
I've long been a huge fan of (Retired) Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, not least because his prized possessions include a scorecard from Game 3 of the 1932 World Series--better known to baseball history as the "called shot" game--which he attended, in person, at the age of 12(!).
On December 30, the outgoing Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Senator Dianne Feinstein, sent a letter to the White House.
The document---which was released earlier today---overviews a number of proposed reforms to U.S.
I have now spent enough quality time with the SSCI interrogation report---and with minority views and the CIA response---that I am ready to begin commenting upon it. This is not to say I have finished reading it all; far from it. A plane flight to Israel and a lot of other hours have only gotten me started.
We are told there is a privacy crisis. The Snowden revelation and other such things have given the sense that we are in a crisis. I think what we have is a privacy panic. What I would call the Snowden left, joined by the Tea Party right, are churning this up way past any reasonable limits. And then, of course, the press chimes in because that’s what the press does. The press has not been particularly good on this subject. In fact, as I will illustrate to you, they regularly report some technological innovation or some event and say it raises privacy concerns. Their ability to analyze th