Logourl black
From our private database of 14,200+ case briefs...

Kadi v. Geithner

United States District Court for the District of Columbia
42 F. Supp. 3d 1 (2012)


Facts

Following the events of September 11, 2001, the President issued Executive Order 13,224 (EO) pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The EO declared a national emergency in relation to the threat posed to the United States by various terrorist organizations. The EO further authorized the United States Secretary of the Treasury (Secretary) (defendant) to designate persons whose property should be blocked if it is found that such persons acted on behalf of, assisted, sponsored, or were otherwise associated with a specially designated global terrorist (SDGT). The Secretary thereafter delegated this authority to the Director of the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) (defendant). OFAC designated Kadi (plaintiff), a Saudi Arabian citizen, a SDGT, thereby blocking Kadi's property subject to United States jurisdiction. Kadi did not receive prior notice of the blocking order, but was subsequently notified by a personal letter outlining the administrative procedures available for challenging the blockage. Kadi petitioned OFAC for reconsideration, providing extensive material in support of his petition. After evaluating both classified and unclassified information, as well as Kadi's submissions, OFAC concluded Kadi's designation was reasonable. OFAC found Kadi acted on behalf of, assisted, and provided financial support to al Qaeda and associated with known terrorists, including Osama bin Laden. OFAC issued a lengthy unclassified memorandum denying Kadi's petition. Kadi brought suit against OFAC, arguing that the designation and blocking of his property were improper. Kadi contended OFAC's actions violated Kadi's right to due process. Kadi further argued that the freezing of his assets constituted both an illegal taking under the Fifth Amendment and an unreasonable search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment. OFAC moved for summary judgment.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Bates, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 251,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,200 briefs, keyed to 189 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.