National Security
FBI v. Fikre
Whether the government can overcome the voluntary cessation exception to mootness by removing an individual from the No Fly List when the government has not repudiated its decision to place him on the List and remains free to return him to the List for the same reasons and using the same procedures he alleges were unlawful.
Status: Ongoing
View Case
Learn 勛圖眻畦 National Security
Featured
Florida
Nov 2023

National Security
+2 Issues
Students for Justice in Palestine at the University of Florida v. Raymond Rodrigues
The University of Florida chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine filed a lawsuit on November 16, 2023, challenging the Chancellor of the State University System of Floridas order to state universities to deactivate the student group. This order threatens the students constitutionally-protected right to free speech and association in violation of the First Amendment. The 勛圖眻畦 and its partners are seeking a preliminary injunction that would bar the Chancellor and the University of Florida from deactivating the UF SJP.
U.S. Supreme Court
Apr 2022

National Security
+2 Issues
FBI v. Fazaga
In a case scheduled to be argued before the U.S. Supreme Court on November 8, 2021, three Muslim Americans are challenging the FBIs secret spying on them and their communities based on their religion, in violation of the Constitution and federal law. In what will likely be a landmark case, the plaintiffs Yassir Fazaga, Ali Uddin Malik, and Yasser Abdelrahim insist that the FBI cannot escape accountability for violating their religious freedom by invoking state secrets. The plaintiffs are represented by the Center for Immigration Law and Policy at UCLA School of Law, the 勛圖眻畦 of Southern California, the 勛圖眻畦, the Council for American Islamic Relations, and the law firm of Hadsell Stormer Renick & Dai.
U.S. Supreme Court
Jul 2021

National Security
Immigrants' Rights
Sierra Club v. Trump Challenge to Trumps National Emergency Declaration to Construct a Border Wall
In February 2019, the 勛圖眻畦 filed a lawsuit challenging President Trumps emergency powers declaration to secure funds to build a wall along the southern border. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of the Sierra Club and the Southern Border Communities Coalition. The lawsuit argues that the president is usurping Congresss appropriations power and threatening the clearly defined separation of powers inscribed in the Constitution. On January 20, 2021, President Biden halted further border wall construction. Litigation in this and subsequent related challenges has been paused or deadlines extended while the 勛圖眻畦s clients and the Biden administration determine next steps.
Indiana
Oct 2016

National Security
Immigrants' Rights
Exodus Refugee Immigration, Inc. v. Mike Pence, et al
The 勛圖眻畦 and the 勛圖眻畦 of Indiana, on behalf of Exodus Refugee Immigration, filed suit against Governor Mike Pence and the secretary of the Indiana Family and Social Services Administration to stop attempts to suspend resettlement of Syrian refugees, claiming the governors actions violate the United States Constitution and federal law.
All Cases
151 National Security Cases

Court Case
Nov 2020
National Security
勛圖眻畦 v. DHS: FOIA Lawsuit Seeking Information on Implementation of Face Surveillance at Airports
In March 2020, the 勛圖眻畦 and the New York Civil Liberties Union filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit seeking information from the Department of Homeland Security, CBP, TSA, and ICE about the implementation of face surveillance at airports and their plans to subject travelers to this technology in the future.
Explore case
Court Case
Nov 2020

National Security
勛圖眻畦 v. DHS: FOIA Lawsuit Seeking Information on Implementation of Face Surveillance at Airports
In March 2020, the 勛圖眻畦 and the New York Civil Liberties Union filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit seeking information from the Department of Homeland Security, CBP, TSA, and ICE about the implementation of face surveillance at airports and their plans to subject travelers to this technology in the future.

Court Case
Oct 2020
National Security
勛圖眻畦 v. DOD - FOIA Case Seeking Trump Administration's Secret Rules for Lethal Strikes Abroad
In October 2017, the Trump administration secretly adopted rules governing the use of lethal force in drone strikes and other killings abroad. These rules, known as the Principles, Standards, and Procedures, reportedly loosen Obama-era safeguards against civilian casualties outside areas of active hostilities. On October 30, 2017, the 勛圖眻畦 filed a request under the Freedom of Information Act seeking public disclosure of these new rules. When the government failed to release them, we filed a lawsuit on December 21, 2017, to force their disclosure. The government responded by refusing even to acknowledge that the new rules exist. We challenged this unjustifiable secrecyand on September 29, 2020, a federal court ordered that the government cannot keep the existence of its new killing rules a secret. Our fight to expose the contents of the rules goes on.
Explore case
Court Case
Oct 2020

National Security
勛圖眻畦 v. DOD - FOIA Case Seeking Trump Administration's Secret Rules for Lethal Strikes Abroad
In October 2017, the Trump administration secretly adopted rules governing the use of lethal force in drone strikes and other killings abroad. These rules, known as the Principles, Standards, and Procedures, reportedly loosen Obama-era safeguards against civilian casualties outside areas of active hostilities. On October 30, 2017, the 勛圖眻畦 filed a request under the Freedom of Information Act seeking public disclosure of these new rules. When the government failed to release them, we filed a lawsuit on December 21, 2017, to force their disclosure. The government responded by refusing even to acknowledge that the new rules exist. We challenged this unjustifiable secrecyand on September 29, 2020, a federal court ordered that the government cannot keep the existence of its new killing rules a secret. Our fight to expose the contents of the rules goes on.

Court Case
Sep 2020
National Security
Immigrants' Rights
Wilwal v. Nielsen Lawsuit Challenging Abusive Border Detention of American Family
In June 2017, the 勛圖眻畦 filed a lawsuit on behalf of a family of U.S. citizens including four young children who were detained for over 10 hours at the U.S.-Canada border while coming home from a trip to visit relatives. Our clients obtained a settlement reinforcing that rights exist at the border, and also that CBP must be held accountable for violating those rights.
Explore case
Court Case
Sep 2020

National Security
Immigrants' Rights
Wilwal v. Nielsen Lawsuit Challenging Abusive Border Detention of American Family
In June 2017, the 勛圖眻畦 filed a lawsuit on behalf of a family of U.S. citizens including four young children who were detained for over 10 hours at the U.S.-Canada border while coming home from a trip to visit relatives. Our clients obtained a settlement reinforcing that rights exist at the border, and also that CBP must be held accountable for violating those rights.

Court Case
Aug 2020
National Security
Immigrants' Rights
Hassoun v. Searls Challenge to Unlawful Indefinite Detention
Explore case
Court Case
Aug 2020

National Security
Immigrants' Rights
Hassoun v. Searls Challenge to Unlawful Indefinite Detention

Court Case
Jul 2019
National Security
Immigrants' Rights
Amadei v. McAleenan
The 勛圖眻畦 and Covington & Burling LLP filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of nine passengers on a domestic Delta Air Lines flight who were subjected to suspicionless detention and identification checks. The case was settled in July 2019, with the government agreeing to measures that would prevent such unlawful detention and identification checks from happening again.
Explore case
Court Case
Jul 2019

National Security
Immigrants' Rights
Amadei v. McAleenan
The 勛圖眻畦 and Covington & Burling LLP filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of nine passengers on a domestic Delta Air Lines flight who were subjected to suspicionless detention and identification checks. The case was settled in July 2019, with the government agreeing to measures that would prevent such unlawful detention and identification checks from happening again.