Walker v. S.W.I.F.T. SCRL

The Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications (SWIFT) (defendant) was an international consortium that provided messaging services and software to thousands of financial institutions around the world, including most major commercial banks, brokerage houses, and stock exchanges. In June 2006, a newspaper article revealed that in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, United States (US) counterterrorism officials gained access to SWIFT’s database of financial records, including the records of thousands of US nationals and other US persons. Ian Walker and other affected US persons (collectively, Walker) (plaintiffs) sued SWIFT for violating their constitutional and statutory rights based on SWIFT’s alleged role as an agent for the government or, in the alternative, for financial institutions. Walker’s complaint did not say how Walker was injured by SWIFT’s actions or expressly allege that SWIFT did not act in good faith; however, Walker alleged that SWIFT did not act in response to legal authorization. SWIFT moved to dismiss the complaint for failing to state a claim, arguing that Walker did not have (1) standing because he failed to plead an injury in fact, (2) First Amendment free-speech rights in his financial records, (3) Fourth Amendment privacy rights in his financial records, or (4) privacy rights in his financial records under the Right to Financial Privacy Act (RFPA). SWIFT further asserted the affirmative defense that it was immune from suit under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) because it merely responded in good faith to government subpoenas.