老熟女午夜福利

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), enacted by Congress after the abuses of the 1960s and 70s, regulates the government鈥檚 conduct of intelligence surveillance inside the United States. It generally requires the government to seek warrants before monitoring Americans鈥� communications. In 2001, however, President Bush authorized the National Security Agency to launch a warrantless wiretapping program, and in 2008 Congress ratified and expanded that program, giving the NSA almost unchecked power to monitor Americans鈥� international phone calls and emails. In February 2013, the Supreme Court dismissed the ACLU's lawsuit challenging the law.

Whether a U.S. citizen can obtain judicial review of a consular decision to deny her spouse a visa.

The Fourth Amendment prohibits the arrest of criminal suspects without probable cause to believe they have committed a crime. Yet after 9/11, former Attorney General John Ashcroft and the U.S. Department of Justice implemented a policy of misusing the federal 鈥渕aterial witness鈥� statute to detain Muslim men for investigative purposes without probable cause to believe that they鈥檇 committed any crime. Pursuant to this policy, our client, Abdullah al-Kidd, a Kansas-born U.S. citizen and former football player at the University of Idaho, was arrested on a material witness warrant in 2003 and imprisoned without charges for 16 days, ostensibly because the government wanted his testimony in someone else鈥檚 criminal case. He was never called to testify and never criminally charged.

In May 2011, the ACLU filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the Justice Department seeking information about the government's use and interpretation of Patriot Act Section 215, which authorizes the government to obtain 鈥渁ny tangible thing鈥� that is 鈥渞elevant to鈥� a terrorism investigation. Our subsequent FOIA lawsuit to enforce the request compelled the government to release dozens of documents, although many others were withheld from the ACLU and the public. The ACLU continued to fight for additional disclosures concerning the government鈥檚 use of Section 215 to secretly collect Americans鈥� information in bulk, but the district court eventually granted the government鈥檚 motion for summary judgment in March 2015.