Constitutional Accountability Center Constitutional Accountability Center
Access to Justice

In Clapper, Supreme Court Majority Turns Article III On Its Head

Washington, DC – On news that the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its decision in Clapper v. Amnesty International USA, which tossed out of court a First Amendment challenge to a law establishing a secretive surveillance program on the basis that there was no proof of precisely who the government secretly targeted, Constitutional Accountability Center released the following reaction:

 

Rochelle Bobroff, Director of CAC’s Access to Courts Program, said, “The Supreme Court majority goes through a series of contortions in order to deny Amnesty International and others the ability to challenge the constitutionality of this controversial surveillance program, making it unlikely that anyone will ever be able to mount such a challenge.  The court’s ruling relies on Article III of the Constitution, but turns it on its head, misinterpreting the Court’s role to hear important constitutional cases into a license to deny review.”

 

CAC Chief Counsel Elizabeth Wydra added, “The Court’s embrace of an overly restrictive ‘certainly impending’ standard will make it more difficult for litigants to access our federal courts, whether they are challenging a federal statute or seeking to hold a company liable for violating federal law.” 

 

#

 

Resources:

 

Constitutional Accountability Center’s “friend of the court” brief filed on the side of Respondents: http://www.scribd.com/doc/107052852/CAC-Clapper-Amicus  

 

“Clapper and the Constitutional Role of the Federal Judiciary,” Rochelle Bobroff, October 25, 2012: http://theusconstitution.org/text-history/1661/clapper-and-constitutional-role-federal-judiciary  

 

“Clapper v. Amnesty International USA: Supreme Court to Resolve Key Court Access Issue In First Amendment Case,” Rochelle Bobroff, September 26, 2012: http://theusconstitution.org/text-history/1629/clapper-v-amnesty-international-usa-supreme-court-resolve-key-court-access-issue  

 

##

 

Constitutional Accountability Center (www.theusconstitution.org) is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history.

 

###

More from Access to Justice

Voting Rights and Democracy
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Nairne v. Landry

In Nairne v. Landry, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is considering whether the Voting Rights Act’s prohibition on vote dilution is a constitutional exercise of Congress’s Fifteenth Amendment enforcement power.
Voting Rights and Democracy
 

United States v. Paxton

In United States v. Paxton, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is considering whether the Materiality Provision in the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits states from denying the right...
Voting Rights and Democracy
 

Mi Familia Vota v. Petersen

In Mi Familia Vota v. Petersen, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is considering whether requiring voters to include their birthplace on voter registration forms violates the Materiality Provision of the...
Rule of Law
 

Iowa v. SEC

In Iowa v. SEC, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit is considering the legality of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s new climate-related disclosure requirements.
Rule of Law
 

Chamber of Commerce v. CFPB

In Chamber of Commerce v. CFPB, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is considering the legality of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s update to its Examination Manual clarifying that discrimination may...
Rule of Law
 

Lackey v. Stinnie

In Lackey v. Stinnie, the Supreme Court is considering when a civil rights plaintiff is entitled to attorney’s fees as the “prevailing party” in a case.