In re Directives Pursuant to Section 105B of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review
551 F.3d 1004 (2008)
- Written by Samantha Arena, JD
Facts
The Protect America Act (PAA), 50 U.S.C. §§ 1805a-c, a temporary set of amendments to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), 50 U.S.C. § 1801, authorized the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) and U.S. Attorney General (AG) to instruct communications service providers to assist in carrying out warrantless searches, for periods of up to one year, in order to gather foreign intelligence from subjects who were foreign agents the government reasonably believed to be outside the United States. In 2007, the government issued directives ordering a service provider (plaintiff) to aid in warrantless surveillance of specified customers. The provider did not comply with the government’s orders and instead challenged the government’s authority to issue the directives before the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC). The FISC concluded that the directives were valid and compelled the provider to comply. The communications provider petitioned for review, arguing that the government must follow Fourth Amendment warrant requirements in issuing directives, or in the alternative, even if a foreign intelligence exception to the warrant requirement exists, the surveillances still violated the Fourth Amendment, because they were unreasonable.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Selya, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.