Amendment (EU Non-US Saudi Arabian resident -Does plaintiff have a EU can review CRIMINAL Kadi 2008) person with his financial way to challenge a decisions of the UN for international resources and funds determination? due process reasons located in Europe If not, DP has been accused of supporting violated terrorism, challenging lawfulness of regulation that freezes his financial resources US Persons Two employees for Balancing test: Espionage Act upheld CRIMINAL Rosen (E.D.Va. 2006) domestically lobby (AIPAC) in -Assessment of the as constitutional as DC are being prosecuted competing societal applied to non-officials for the violations of the interests transmitting oral espionage act, received Defendants: Significant, information that they confidential information implicate core values KNOW is potentially from a US government 1st amendment harmful to U.S. official and then passed designed to protect the information along to just Gov’t: Not gov’t Israeli officials and the secrets but NDI, no media (but private matter value of an citizens, not informed public, may gov’t officials) be restricted in service of security nation’s -Narrowly tailored to instances in which need for secrecy is legitimate Relationship of to gov’t person whose First Amendment rights are implicated (those w/official gov’t positions and those
Amendment Kadi (EU 2008) Non-US person international Saudi Arabian resident with his financial resources and funds located in Europe accused of supporting terrorism, challenging lawfulness of regulation that freezes his financial resources -Does plaintiff have a way to challenge a determination? If not, DP has been violated EU can review decisions of the UN for due process reasons CRIMINAL Rosen (E.D.Va. 2006) US Persons domestically Two employees for lobby (AIPAC) in DC are being prosecuted for the violations of the espionage act, received confidential information from a US government official and then passed the information along to Israeli officials and the media (but private citizens, not gov’t officials) Balancing test: -Assessment of the competing societal interests Defendants: Significant, implicate core values 1st amendment designed to protect Gov’t: Not just gov’t secrets but NDI, no matter value of an informed public, may be restricted in service of nation’s security -Narrowly tailored to instances in which need for secrecy is legitimate Relationship of gov’t to person whose First Amendment rights are implicated (those w/official gov’t positions and those Espionage Act upheld as constitutional as applied to non-officials transmitting oral information that they KNOW is potentially harmful to U.S. CRIMINAL
ICTL_Rascoff_Fall_2011_Case_Chart.docx