United States v. Afshari

412 F.3d 1071 (2005)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

United States v. Afshari

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
412 F.3d 1071 (2005)

  • Written by Tanya Munson, JD

Facts

The Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) was an Iranian Marxist militant group that was founded in the 1960s to overthrow the Iranian regime at the time. The MEK had carried out terrorist activities against the Iranian regime and the United States, including taking American embassy personnel as hostages in 1979. The MEK had continued to engage in terrorist activities after the fall of the Iranian regime with the support of Saddam Hussein’s regime. The US State Department designated the MEK as a foreign terrorist organization. Under 8 U.S.C. § 1189(a)(1), to designate foreign terrorist organizations, the secretary of state must make specific findings that the organization engaged in terrorist activities that threatened the security of the United States. The designation must then receive congressional approval and is subject to judicial review. The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia could set aside a designation for ordinary administrative-law reasons, such as for being arbitrary and capricious or an abuse of discretion. A designation could be revoked by Congress or the secretary of state. 18 U.S.C. § 2339B(a)(1) prohibited providing material support to a designated terrorist organization. From 1997 to 2001, Roya Rahmani and others solicited charitable contributions for the Committee for Human Rights, which were wired to a MEK bank account. Rahmani and the others participated in a conference call with a MEK leader and were informed that the MEK had been designated as a foreign terrorist organization. Despite this knowledge, Rahmani and the others continued soliciting and sending money and credit cards to the MEK. Rahmani and the others had sent at least several hundred thousand dollars to the MEK. Rahmani and the others were indicted for knowingly and willingly conspiring to provide support for a designated terrorist organization. The district court dismissed the indictment on the ground that the terrorist-designation statute, 8 U.S.C. 1189(a)(1), was unconstitutional. Rahmani and the others argued that 18 U.S.C. § 2339B denied them their constitutional rights because they were prohibited from collaterally attacking the designation of MEK as a foreign terrorist organization.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Kleinfeld, 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 815,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  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.

Here's why 815,000 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership