| JURIST Search: "ashcroft" | |
| Searching the JURIST archive... |  |
|
 |
|
Federal court: post-9/11 detainee lawsuit against federal officials dismissed
January 17, 2013 by Jerry Votava
A judge for the US District Court for the Eastern District of New York on Tuesday dismissed a lawsuit against federal law enforcement officials by men who claim they were illegally detained after 9/11. The suit is Turkmen v. Ashcroft. The court dismissed the suit against former Department of.... [more]
Supreme Court remanded Ashcroft immunity case [this day at law]
May 18, 2012 by Cody Harding
On May 18, 2009, the US Supreme Court ruled in Ashcroft v. Iqbal, concerning a complaint filed against former US Attorney General John Ashcroft, FBI Director Robert Mueller and other officials. The Court held 5-4 that terrorism suspect Javaid Iqbal failed to adequately state a claim under Rule 8.... [more]
Gonzales left DOJ as AG resignation took effect [this day at law]
September 14, 2011 by Clay Flaherty
On September 14, 2007, Alberto Gonzales officially resigned from the US Department of Justice (DOJ) as the US Attorney General. Gonzales served a turbulent two-and-a-half years in the Bush administration after he was nominated in February 2005 to replace John Ashcroft. He was ultimately forced to.... [more]
Ninth Circuit ruled no immunity for Ashcroft [this day at law]
September 4, 2011 by Clay Flaherty
On September 4, 2009, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that former attorney general John Ashcroft was not entitled to immunity when he used the federal material witness statute to detain and investigate terrorism suspects without probable cause. In the case at issue, Al-Kidd v..... [more]
Federal appeals court says Ashcroft immune from post-9/11 detainee lawsuit
August 4, 2011 by Maureen Cosgrove
The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on Wednesday ruled that former US attorney general John Ashcroft is entitled to absolute immunity from the claims of a Muslim American detained for two weeks after the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. The ruling is consistent with the recent.... [more]
Supreme Court rules Ashcroft immune from suit over witness detention
May 31, 2011 by Zach Zagger
The US Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled in Ashcroft v. al-Kidd that a witness in a terror investigation cannot challenge the constitutionality of an objectively reasonable arrest pursuant to a validly obtained warrant even if the government did not call or had no intention of calling the witness for.... [more]
Supreme Court hears Ashcroft immunity, Confrontation Clause cases
March 2, 2011 by Brian Jackson
The US Supreme Court heard oral arguments Wednesday in two cases: one regarding the extent of immunity for a federal official and another regarding the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause. In Ashcroft v. Al-Kidd, former US attorney general John Ashcroft, appealed the decision of the US Court of.... [more]
Second Circuit ruled for government in post-9/11 detention case [this day at law]
December 18, 2010 by Dwyer Arce
On December 18, 2009, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled that post-arrest detention is legal in cases where the detainees are reasonably detained. The case, Turkmen v. Ashcroft, challenged the alleged racial profiling, arbitrary detention and abuse of Muslim, Arab and South Asian.... [more]
Supreme Court to hear Ashcroft immunity appeal
October 18, 2010 by Ashley Hileman
The US Supreme Court on Monday granted certorari in Ashcroft v. al-Kidd to determine whether former US attorney general John Ashcroft is entitled to absolute or qualified immunity against claims that he used the material witness statute as a "pretext" to preventatively detain terrorism suspects..... [more]
Supreme Court refuses to take Arar rendition appeal
June 14, 2010 by Jaclyn Belczyk
The US Supreme Court on Monday denied certiorari in Arar v. Ashcroft, a case concerning the US government's extraordinary rendition policy. Canadian citizen Maher Arar asked the court in February to overturn a lower court ruling that he cannot sue the US government for damages based on his dete....... [more]
|
|
|
|