CRM 361 - Case brief Case: Ashcroft v. Kidd, 131 S. Ct. 2074 (2011) Parties: Petitioner: John Ashcroft Respondent: Abdullah Al Kidd

******** v **** **** ************* * Kidd *** * ** 2074 ***************** **** ******************* ******** Al Kidd FactsThe *** arrested Abdullah ******* ** 2003as ** on *** *** Saudi ****** *** ******* ** *** held as a ******** witness *** 16 **** ***** being ****** ****** to counsel His ****** *** ** the **** ****** ** *** ****** of **** Omar *********** *** was ***** ********* ** *** ******* Al-Kidd *** ** ****** ***** ** ****** *********** ******* ***** *** **************** ******* Al-Kidd **** argued that *** ********** *** ****** its ***** ** ******* *** ** a material ******* for **** ** ******** ** ******* **** the ********** *** **** the **** ******* ** **** ***** ********* terroristsPrior ****************** went ** court ** sue *** ************* ******* **** Ashcroft *** ******* *** position in detaining *** as * ******** ******* *** ** ***** ** Appeals for *** Ninth ******* in ********* **** denied Ashcroft’s defense ** absolute ******** as * civil ******* ***** Al-Kidd’s arrest *** no link ** *************** ****** *** Supreme ***** ****** ** ****** ** *********** ****** in ********** Presented/ ********* ** ****** ***** ** *** ******* ***** *** whether Ashcroft ** a ****** ********** official ********* for ******** under *** ****** ********* *** ** *** ****** *** whether *** Fourth ********* ********* *** use ** * ******** ******* ******* ** detain * subject ** ******* further ************* ** *** ****** ******* ***** ** ******* *** Fourth Amendment *** ***** when ********* Al-KiddArguments/ Objectives of the PartiesAl-Kidd **** Ashcroft *** ******* *** ******** ******* ******* when ** ******** him for ** *********** case ** claims **** ******** *** **** *** **** approach to ********** ****** him *** **** seventy other Muslims Ashcroft **** the ******* of ****** immunity ***** *** ******* ********* ** *** duties ** an ******* of *** ********** He intended ** reverse the ****** ** *** ***** ***** **** *** found *** **************** ******* Court ** ** *** ******** ******** the ******** ** the lower ***** ** ******** **** the ********** ****** *** ****** ** proof to show **** ******** had ********** ****** ***** it *** *** ******* ** ******* ************************ ***** ******** **** an ****** *** ** ** *********** ********* ********** ** the motive ** *** arresting ******* *** ********* ****** ****** ****** ** *** limited arguments **** *** ********* presented ** *********** the ******** witness ******* The ***** *** accept that *** ********* of the ****** *** not provide safeguards ** human dignity especially in ********* times *** ****** focused ** *** availability ** evidence ******* ******** ******* of ********** the ********** use ** *** ******** ******* ******* ** detain ********* ***** ********** was that *** qualified immunity ****** ********** ********* **** ******* * ****** for ********** *** ******** ********** in the dispensation ** ***** ************** *** Case ** *** Core Value ** ************ ******** ** *** **** **** ***** ** *** **** ***** ** *** ***** ** *** Material ******* ******* *** ***** ******** *** **** of *** burden ** ***** ** ******* who *** ****** ** **** * ****** link of *** ******* ** ******** *********** **** ***** **** **** ******** require *** ********* of ***** enforcing **** to ****** *** absence ** ***** ** *** ****** the court ******* ** *********** *** ******** ** * mistake *** ****** ******* hold ******** *********** ** **** ********** the ******* ** ************ ******* ** the ******** witness ******* *** attorney ******* *** ***** officials are ** *** ***** ********* when ************ ******* **** **** lack *********** ****

Click here to download attached files: Case Brief.docx