Access to Justice

RELEASE: CAC Reacts to Supreme Court Ruling in FBI v. Fazaga

WASHINGTON – Following the Supreme Court’s ruling this morning in Federal Bureau of Investigation v. Fazaga, a case in which the Court considered whether allegations of unlawful government surveillance may be adjudicated using procedures in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act instead of being dismissed as a result of the state secrets privilege, Constitutional Accountability Center Senior Appellate Counsel Brian Frazelle issued the following reaction:

While we are disappointed that the Court did not recognize that FISA displaces the state secrets privilege, we’re relieved that the Court stopped there, leaving other questions open in a way that may allow for accountability in this and other cases. In particular, the government argued that the state secrets privilege has a constitutional foundation in the president’s duties under Article II. If accepted, that position could make it harder for Congress and the courts to rein in future abuses of the privilege. But the Court avoided resolving the issue, indicating that it remains an open question whether the privilege has any basis in the Constitution or is instead (as we showed in our brief) entirely a product of the common law.

#

Resources:

CAC case page in Federal Bureau of Investigation v. Fazaga: https://www.theusconstitution.org/litigation/federal-bureau-of-investigation-v-fazaga/

##

Constitutional Accountability Center is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history. Visit CAC’s website at www.theusconstitution.org.

###

More from Access to Justice

Access to Justice
May 9, 2024

RELEASE: In overbroad ruling, conservative majority restricts the rights of innocent car owners whose vehicles are seized by the government

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s decision at the Supreme Court in Culley v. Marshall, a...
By: Brian R. Frazelle
Access to Justice
U.S. Supreme Court

Williams v. Washington

In Williams v. Washington, the Supreme Court is considering whether states may force civil rights litigants who bring claims against state officials in state court under Section 1983 to first exhaust their administrative remedies.
Access to Justice
April 12, 2024

RELEASE: Court Unanimously Rejects Atextual “Transportation Industry” Requirement for FAA Exemption, Allowing Truck Drivers Their Day in Court

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s decision at the Supreme Court in Bissonnette v. LePage Bakeries...
By: Miriam Becker-Cohen
Access to Justice
March 20, 2024

RELEASE: Justices Weigh Immunity for Government Officials Who Target Political Adversaries with Arrest

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Gonzalez v....
By: Brian R. Frazelle
Access to Justice
February 20, 2024

RELEASE: Court Grapples Once Again with Federal Arbitration Act’s Exemption for Transportation Workers

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Bissonnette v....
By: Miriam Becker-Cohen
Access to Justice
February 19, 2024

Bakery Drivers Head to High Court Searching for Arbitration Exit

Bloomberg Law
Industry test would add fights on transportation firm meaning With circuits split, high court to...
By: Miriam Becker-Cohen, Jennifer Bennett