United States v. Hasbajrami
United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York
2016 WL 1029500 (2016)
- Written by Tammy Boggs, JD
Facts
Under amended provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) (§ 702), the federal government was authorized to conduct targeted electronic surveillance of persons abroad (foreigners) in the interest of national security. Specifically, under the PRISM program, the government would identify users’ email accounts to an Internet service provider, which in turn provided communications that had been sent “to” or “from” the targeted account. If an American citizen happened to be on the other end of the email, the government’s surveillance under the PRISM program would include surveillance of American citizens. Using collected communications under the program, a federal terrorism task force discovered that American Agron Hasbajrami (defendant) had exchanged numerous emails with an individual he believed was an agent of a Pakistani terrorist organization. Hasbajrami sent money to the individual to support Islamic terrorist operations and arranged to travel to an area in Pakistan to join a jihadist fighting group. Federal agents arrested Hasbajrami at the airport as he was en route to Pakistan, and Hasbajrami was charged with three counts of attempting to provide material support to terrorists. Hasbajrami filed a motion to suppress evidence obtained or derived from surveillance conducted pursuant to § 702, arguing that the government’s conduct was unconstitutional.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Gleeson, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.