1 State Secrets 1 State Secrets
1.1 United States v. Zubaydah 1.1 United States v. Zubaydah
State Secrets
The U.S. Government asserted the state secrets privilege in withholding documents relating to enhanced interrogation techniques used on Zubaydah. The court ordered the docs produced. US is appealing.
The Supreme Court will decide whether the 9th Circuit was wrong to substitute its evaluation of harm to national security over the government's.
Oral argument audio and transcript available via Oyez link.
1.1.2. Supreme Court docket 20-827
1.1.3. Petitioner United States' Brief
1.1.4. Respondent Zubaydah's Brief
1.1.5. Zubaydah Oral Argument
Procedural History Procedural History
Husayn sues countries in which he was tortured by the CIA. Poland, one of the countries, investigates & concludes: “sorry, nothing to see here.” Husayn goes to European Court of Human Rights to complain. EU says “Poland, your investigation sucked. Do over.” [1] Poland like “ok fine. Hey, Husayn, can you use special magic US law to get witnesses & info from the US?” Husayn tries to use 28 USC 1782 to subpoena wits.[2] CIA says nope, cuz state secrets. US District Court agrees with CIA, quashes subpoenas, dismisses case[3] Husayn appeals. 9th Cir. Reverses, saying “trial court, your finding sucked. Do over with the proper privilege analysis.”[4]
[US applies for a rehearing en banc -- they want a larger portion of the Circuit to rehear the case & hopefully reverse. 9th Cir denies petition with a sharply divided opinion that is worth reading.][5]
US then petitions SCOTUS, petition granted, case is pending.
[1] Husayn (Abu Zubaydah) v. Poland, App. No. 7511/13, Eur. Ct. H.R. (2015) available at https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-146047
[2] § 1782. Assistance to foreign and international tribunals and to litigants before such tribunals, 28 USCS § 1782 (Current through Public Law 117-80, approved December 27, 2021.), available at https://advance-lexis-com.libdata.lib.ua.edu/api/document?collection=statutes-legislation&id=urn:contentItem:8SG9-5HW2-D6RV-H0P8-00000-00&context=1516831.
[3] In re Zubaydah, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 240181, 2018 WL 11150135 (United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington February 21, 2018, Filed), available at https://advance-lexis-com.libdata.lib.ua.edu/api/document?collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:60KD-TB71-JX8W-M382-00000-00&context=1516831.
[4] Husayn v. Mitchell, 938 F.3d 1123, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 28004, 2019 WL 4458386 (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit September 18, 2019, Filed), available at https://advance-lexis-com.libdata.lib.ua.edu/api/document?collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:5X2X-YX31-JJSF-202G-00000-00&context=1516831.
[5] Husayn v. Mitchell, 965 F.3d 775, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 22508, 2020 WL 4046037 (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit July 20, 2020, Filed). https://advance-lexis-com.libdata.lib.ua.edu/api/document?collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:60D6-5KG1-JJ6S-6038-00000-00&context=1516831.