United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia
447 F. Supp. 2d 538 (2006)
In 1978, Congress responded to concerns about a foreign intelligence exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement by implementing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), 50 U.S.C. § 1801. The Act authorized certain searches and electronic surveillance, and instituted specific steps that the government had to follow in acquiring approval for those activities, including minimization procedures meant to protect against procurement and dissemination of unnecessary information collected during surveillance. The procedures called for a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) judge to make a probable-cause determination based upon the government’s application and issue an order in compliance with FISA. Some time after FISA’s enactment, Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman (defendants) were charged with conspiracy to communicate national defense information in violation of federal law. It was alleged that Lawrence Franklin, a Department of Defense employee who had access to classified information, communicated that information to Rosen and Wiessman, who were lobbyists for the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Rosen and Wiessman then communicated the information to unauthorized persons, including members of the media and foreign officials. To carry out its investigation, the government obtained orders from the FISC, pursuant to FISA. Because the investigation was related to national security, the orders were classified. Rosen and Wiessman moved to obtain disclosure of the applications and suppress evidence obtained based on arguments that FISC incorrectly determined that the defendants were agents of a foreign power and that the government failed to comply with FISA minimization procedures.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Ellis, J.)
What to do next…
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.
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 219,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 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.