The Supreme Court will specify whether 3 Muslim men can listen in the Federal Investigation Bureau after 9/11.

Abstract: File: F.B.I Seal. Hanging in the flag of the headquarters of the President of Washington DC March 9, 2007. The chip somodevilla / getty picture is silent in September 11, 2001, in the United States. ...

File: F.B.I Seal. Hanging in the flag of the headquarters of the President of Washington DC March 9, 2007. The chip somodevilla / getty picture is silent in September 11, 2001, in the United States.  The Supreme Court will consider whether to refuse most of the claims according to the government's so-called national secret privileges. When invoking national security benefits, legal doctrines are sometimes declared.
The 2011 lawsuit accused the Federal Investigation Bureau of the mainstream mosque in the southern California, and regularly supervise the Muslim Americans due to religion. It blames religious discrimination in violation of the US constitution, through the first amendment to Muslim, and violates the fourth amendment to prohibiting unreasonable search and epilepsy.  
The plaintiff is: Eritrea - American citizen Yassir Fazaga, which is Omaham Vetjo of O'Alan Foundation; Native American Citizen Ali Uddin Malik, he participated in the Irvine Islam Center And Yasser Abdel Rachim, the US permanent resident from Egypt, and he also participated in the Islamic Center of Ilva. They are represented by the US Citizen Freedom and other people.  During the 14-month period of 2006 and 2007, the Federal Investigation Bureau collected part of the Muslim information as the information of the Muslims for Informant named Craig Monteilh. 11 Resistance investigation. Monte Ilh got Muslims in Muslims in California, adopted the Muslim name and said he wants to convert according to the court documentation to Islam. According to the court papers, Monteilh also recorded dialogue and supervised.
 Headquartered on the 9th American Tour Court of Tour in San Francisco dismissed the government's national secret argument, claims that the complaint should be analyzed according to a part of the law, let the judge review the legitimacy of supervision.
In court papers, the Ministry of Justice said Only if the government intends to use the evidence obtained from individual monitoring, it is not only employed, not the mechanism of challenging the method used by the Federal Investigation Bureau. [The Ministry of Justice also said that Article 9 Tour is neglected the highest court precedent, so that the "court should not pass the secrets used by the STA to harm the national security in the lawsuit." The Avilt Upanotur case involving national secret privileges Court. In this case, the government is seeking to prevent two former CIA contractors from questioning the criminal survey of Poland, asking questions about the role of Al Qaeda characters, who repeatedly suffers from vessels, a way to simulate drowning is widely considered to be Torture. 

Comments from netizens

0comments