{"id":158,"date":"2009-10-01T08:02:52","date_gmt":"2009-10-01T15:02:52","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.harvardnsj.com\/?p=158"},"modified":"2009-10-01T08:02:52","modified_gmt":"2009-10-01T15:02:52","slug":"supreme-court-to-hear-case-challenging-material-support-law","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/nsj\/2009\/10\/supreme-court-to-hear-case-challenging-material-support-law\/","title":{"rendered":"Supreme Court to Hear Case Challenging \u201cMaterial Support\u201d Law"},"content":{"rendered":"

The Supreme Court agreed on Wednesday to hear Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project<\/em> and a countersuit, Humanitarian Law Project v. Holder<\/em>.\u00a0 These cases will address whether, under the First and Fifth amendments, the \u201cmaterial support\u201d for terrorism provision of 18 U.S.C. \u00a7 2339B is unconstitutionally vague.\u00a0 The petitioners, which include Attorney General Holder and the Department of Justice, as well as Secretary Clinton and the Department of State, argue that the law\u2019s ban on the knowing provision of \u201cany *** service, *** training, [or] expert advice or assistance\u201d to a designated foreign terrorist organization is not unconstitutionally vague.\u00a0 \u00a0According to the Department of Justice\u2019s petition<\/a>, \u201c[s]ince 2001, the United States has charged approximately 120 defendants with violations of the material-support provision of [the statute], and approximately 60 defendants have been convicted.\u201d<\/p>\n

The respondents, including individuals convicted of supporting terrorist groups that advocate a Kurdish state in Turkey and a Tamil state in Sri Lanka, said the law fails to provide \u201cconstitutionally adequate notice to ordinary citizens where criminal liability for speech and association is on the line.\u201d \u00a0Georgetown University Law Center professor David Cole is counsel of record for the respondents.<\/p>\n

The Ninth Circuit addressed the question in 2007, holding that the terms \u201ctraining\u201d and \u201cservice\u201d were unconstitutionally vague, but that \u201cexpert advice or assistance\u201d was only vague if not used in conjunction with the \u201cderived from scientific [or] technical … knowledge\u201d language in the latter part of the provision.\u00a0 It also held that \u201cpersonnel\u201d was not vague as used in the statute.\u00a0 For the American Civil Liberties Union\u2019s reaction to this decision, please see its press release<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The petitioners argue that the Ninth Circuit\u2019s holdings rest on a confused interpretation of the vagueness and overbreadth doctrines.\u00a0 In addition to countering those arguments, the Humanitarian Law Project (HLP) filed a conditional cross-petition asking the Court to revisit the provisions the Ninth Circuit had upheld in the government\u2019s favor. \u00a0The Court granted both petitions, which has effectively resulted in a decision to review the entire Ninth Circuit decision.<\/p>\n

Find the petition, response, cross-petition, and Ninth Circuit opinion all here<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Supreme Court agreed on Wednesday to hear Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project and a countersuit, Humanitarian Law Project v. Holder.\u00a0 These cases will address whether, under the First and Fifth amendments, the \u201cmaterial support\u201d for terrorism provision of 18 U.S.C. \u00a7 2339B is unconstitutionally vague.\u00a0 The petitioners, which include Attorney General Holder and the Department of Justice, as well as Secretary Clinton and the Department of State, argue that the law\u2019s ban on the knowing provision of \u201cany *** service, *** training, [or] expert advice or assistance\u201d to a designated foreign terrorist organization is not unconstitutionally vague.\u00a0 \u00a0According to […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"site-sidebar-layout":"default","site-content-layout":"","ast-site-content-layout":"default","site-content-style":"default","site-sidebar-style":"default","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-banner-title-visibility":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","ast-disable-related-posts":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","astra-migrate-meta-layouts":"default","ast-page-background-enabled":"default","ast-page-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"ast-content-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-158","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/peZtUX-2y","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/nsj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/158","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/nsj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/nsj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/nsj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/nsj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=158"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/nsj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/158\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/nsj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=158"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/nsj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=158"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/nsj\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=158"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}