As you may have heard, the US Supreme Court will hear arguments this morning regarding the constitutionality of an extremely broad provision of the USA PATRIOT Act that restricts the ability of advocacy groups and charities to do work overseas. The case, Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project, challenges the criminalization of expert advice, training, service, or assistance "derived from scientific [or] technical . . . knowledge" to a designated foreign terrorist organization. Everyone involved in the case--the Attorney General, the Humanitarian Law Project, the numerous amicus curiae (some represented by the ACLU)--emphatically oppose terrorism. But some of these organizations would like to engage in dialogue and training with designated organizations, to help provide humanitarian aid, to train in peaceful conflict resolution, and to assist with human rights advocacy. The statute at issue is so broad that attempting to convince violent groups to adopt non-violent strategies for social change could subject a person to 15 years in federal prison.
This case was originally brought by two American citizens, Professor Ralph Fertig and Dr. Nagalingam Jeyaligam, and by an organization headed by Prof. Fertig, the Humanitarian Law Project, hoping for legal approval of coordination with two organizations on the U.S. designated list of terrorist organizations: the Kurdistan Workers' Party and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eslan. Lower Courts have struck down some provisions of the criminal statute at issue, and now the Supreme Court will resolve whether that was proper.
The heart of the argument today involves whether the government can criminalize pure speech that advocates lawful nonviolent activities. The government will argue that, in the name of fighting terrorism, they are justified in doing just that. The Humanitarian Law Project will argue that this provision, and the government's theory of the case, justify imprisonment for submitting an amicus brief in federal court, petitioning Congress or the United Nations for legal reform, or speaking to the media in support of a designated organization. The First Amendment (which, we just learned, protects the rights of corporations to contribute to political campaigns) must also protect those core speech activities as well.
Humanitarian Law Project will be ably represented this morning by David Cole, of Georgetown University and the Center for Constitutional Rights. Many of you probably remember Prof. Cole's keynote speech at the Scolnick Awards dinner in 2006--a very memorable evening.
