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
April 28, 2026

CAC Release: In Cisco v. Doe Argument, Justices Grapple with the Scope of Liability Under Two Critical Human Rights Statutes

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Cisco Systems...
By: Miriam Becker-Cohen, Harith Khawaja
Access to Justice
April 27, 2026

Human Rights Suit Over Cisco Work for China Heads to Supreme Court

Bloomberg Law
CAC Senior Appellate Counsel Miriam Becker-Cohen was interviewed by Bloomberg Law about our brief in Cisco...
Access to Justice
April 17, 2026

The Most Offensive Thing a Supreme Court Justice Can Do Is Be Honest About the Supreme Court

Balls & Strikes
This Week In Other Stuff We Appreciated Judges Overseeing Louisiana’s Landmark Oil Cases Have Financial...
Access to Justice
April 20, 2026

CAC Release: Court Considers Whether to Expand or Restrict Authority of Federal Courts to Collaterally Review State Court Judgments

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in T.M. v....
By: Miriam Becker-Cohen, Michelle Berger
Access to Justice
April 14, 2026

Doctors Hope Justices Maintain Shield Against Med Mal Suits

CAC Kendall Fellow Michelle Berger discussed CAC's amicus brief in T.M. v. University of Maryland with Law360....
Access to Justice
U.S. Supreme Court

Cisco Systems v. Doe

In Cisco Systems v. Doe, the Supreme Court is considering, among other questions, whether the Torture Victim Protection Act imposes liability on those who aid and abet torture.