877-518-0660
Lawline.com, The Legal Beat
Welcome to The Legal Beat. Here we have assembled news articles, updates, and plenty of various information
on an array of different topics. Choose from the categories above or just view the most recent articles here.

Supreme Court will Decide Whether Ashcroft can be Sued for 9/11 Policy

Posted: October 19th, 2010
By: Michael Rutledge
Category: The News Beat

Bookmark and Share

Supreme Court will Decide Whether Ashcroft can be Sued for 9/11 Policy

The U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether an American Muslim has standing to sue Bush administration attorney general John Ashcroft. Abdullah al-Kidd alleges that Ashcroft is responsible for his improper arrest and detention after the September 11 terrorist attacks. Al-Kidd was one of dozens of Muslims and Arabs arrested during the period following the attacks.


Al-Kidd was arrested at Dulles International Airport in 2003, as he was preparing to board a flight to Saudi Arabia. TH FBI persuaded a judge to issue an arrest warrant by contending that al-Kidd had purchased a $5,000 one-way ticket. They neglected to mention, however, that al-Kidd is American born and has a wife and kids in America. Also, his lawyers say he had purchased a considerably less expensive round trip ticket.


The Supreme Court will not rule on the details of Abdullah al-Kidd’s case. Instead, they will focus on whether or not al-Kidd and his attorneys can show that specific actions of then attorney general Ashcroft cross the limits of the Constitution. Ashcroft, who is represented by the Obama administration, says he should be shielded from suits concerning official duties.


The attorney general has never been held personally liable for official actions, and Ashcroft has been victorious in other suits that have been levied against him. In a previous Supreme Court case, Ashcroft prevailed over a detainee, Javaid Iqbal, who sought to hold him liable for his confinement. The decision of the court, 5-4, held that the connection between Ashcroft’s actions as attorney general and the confinement of the detainee was too attenuated.


Supreme Court rulings do allow high ranking officials to be held liable, but they set a high bar. An official must be tied directly to a violation of constitutional rights. The federal appeals court in San Francisco held that al-Kidd’s case met this high standard and criticized the use of material witness warrants for national security.

To learn more watch our top-rated course "The Basics of Civil Rights Litigation" by Scott Michelman

For the full article, click here

Post a Comment | (0) Comments | Permanent Link | Go Back

Post A Comment

Your Name:

Your Email:

Your Comment:

Your Website: (optional)

Comments

There are no comments for this post.