DOCSLIB.ORG

Continuation of Oversight of the Wen Ho Lee Case Hearings

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Continuation of Oversight of the Wen Ho Lee Case Hearings S. HRG. 106–1040 CONTINUATION OF OVERSIGHT OF THE WEN HO LEE CASE HEARINGS BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATIVE OVERSIGHT AND THE COURTS OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION SEPTEMBER 27 AND OCTOBER 3, 2000 Serial No. J–106–109 Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary ( U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 74–193 WASHINGTON : 2001 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate 11-MAY-2000 08:07 Nov 02, 2001 Jkt 074193 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 E:\HR\OC\A193.XXX pfrm07 PsN: A193 COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah, Chairman STROM THURMOND, South Carolina PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware JON KYL, Arizona HERBERT KOHL, Wisconsin MIKE DEWINE, Ohio DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California JOHN ASHCROFT, Missouri RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin SPENCER ABRAHAM, Michigan ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York BOB SMITH, New Hampshire MANUS COONEY, Chief Counsel and Staff Director BRUCE A. COHEN, Minority Chief Counsel SUBCOMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATIVE OVERSIGHT AND THE COURTS CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa, Chairman JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey STROM THURMOND, South Carolina RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin SPENCER ABRAHAM, Michigan CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York KOLAN DAVIS, Chief Counsel MATT TANIELIAN, Minority Chief Counsel (II) VerDate 11-MAY-2000 13:22 Nov 01, 2001 Jkt 074193 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 E:\HR\OC\A193.XXX pfrm04 PsN: A193 C O N T E N T S WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 2000 STATEMENT OF COMMITTEE MEMBER Page Specter, Hon. Arlen, a U.S. Senator from the State of Pennsylvania ................. 1 WITNESSES Bay, Norman, U.S. Attorney, District of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM .......... 2 Curran, Edward, Security Chief, Department of Energy, Washington, DC ....... 2 Parkinson, Larry, General Counsel, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Depart- ment of Justice, Washington, DC ....................................................................... 2 Robinson, James, Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division, Department Justice, Washington, DC ..................................................................................... 2 TUESDAY, OCTOBER 3, 2000 STATEMENTS OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS Grassley, Hon. Charles E., a U.S. Senator from the State of Iowa ..................... 36 Specter, Hon. Arlen, a U.S. Senator from the State of Pennsylvania ................. 35 WITNESSES Richter, John, Scientist, Department of Energy ................................................... 37 Trulock, Notra, III, Former Intelligence Chief, Department of Energy, accom- panied by Larry Klayman, Counsel .................................................................... 51 Vrooman, Robert, Former Counterintelligence Officer, Department of Energy . 49 Wilkins, Ron, Computer Network Specialist, Los Alamos Laboratory ................ 63 Younger, Stephen, Scientist, Department of Energy ............................................ 40 SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD Barreras, Lawrence, Senior Warden, Cornell Corrections, Inc., Santa Fe County Correctional Facility, Santa Fe, NM: memorandum, December 10, 1999 .................................................................. 200 memorandum, January 4, 2000 ....................................................................... 210 Bryant, Daniel J., Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legislative Affairs, Department of Justice, Washington, DC: June 22, 2001, letter ........................................................................................ 75 letter to Senator Leahy, June 28, 2001 .......................................................... 278 Capps, Michael H., Deputy Director for Developmental Programs, Defense Security Service, Department of Defense, Alexandria, VA, letter to Senator Specter, June 25, 2001 ......................................................................................... 268 Chronology of Significant Events, chart ................................................................ 68 Cline, John D., Freedman, Boyd, Daniels, Hollander, Goldberg & Cline, P.A., letter to Robert J. Gorence, Esq .......................................................................... 216 Collingwood, John E., Assistant Director, Office of Public and Congressional Affairs, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, DC, letter with enclo- sures to Senator Specter ...................................................................................... 93 (III) VerDate 11-MAY-2000 08:07 Nov 02, 2001 Jkt 074193 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 E:\HR\OC\A193.XXX pfrm07 PsN: A193 IV Page Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, Washington, DC, Execu- tive Business Meeting: October 14, 1999, summary and attachments ................................................ 301 November 17, 1999, summary and attachments ........................................... 309 Cunningham, Charles J., Jr., Director, Defense Security Service, Department of Defense, Alexandria, VA, letter, with attachment, to Senator Specter, February 14, 2000 ................................................................................................ 264 Curran, Edward J., Director, Office of Counterintelligence, Department of Energy, Washington, DC, letter, with attachments, to Senator Specter, January 31, 2000 .................................................................................................. 258 Department of Energy Chronology, May 6, 1999 .................................................. 64 Department of Energy, news release: August 12, 1999 ................................................................................................ 279 January 19, 2000 .............................................................................................. 287 Deposition of Supervisory Special Agent Craig Schmidt, July 29, 1999 ............. 99 District Court of New Mexico, news release, December 10, 1999 ........................ 282 Failed Attempts by Wen Ho Lee to Enter LANL X Division After His Access Had Been Terminated, table ............................................................................... 72 Federal Bureau of Investigation, document, August 29, 1995 ............................. 97 Federation of American Scientists, Washington, DC: Affidavit In Support of a Search Warrant for Wen Ho Lee’s House, declassified FBI affidavit .............................................................................. 78 Motion for Discovery of Materials Related to Selective Prosecution, United States District Court for the District of New Mexico, document appearing on FAS website: ........................................................................... 154 Declaration of Robert Vrooman ....................................................................... 197 Robert Vrooman, President Clinton’s comments on Wen Ho Lee, docu- ment appearing on FAS website .................................................................. 294 Freeh, Louis J., Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Department of Justice, Washington, DC, letter to Senator Specter .......................................... 87 Friedman, Gregory H., Inspector General, Department of Energy, Wash- ington, DC, memorandum, April 3, 2001 ........................................................... 250 Gallagher, Neil J., Assistant Director, National Security Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Department of Justice, Washington, DC: letter to Senator Thompson, November 10, 1999 .......................................... 254 letter to Edward J. Curran .............................................................................. 89 Grindler, Gary G., Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General, Department of Justice, Washington, DC, and Nicholas M. Gess, Associate Deputy Attor- ney General, Department of Justice, Washington, DC, memorandum and attachments, January 12, 2000 ........................................................................... 217 Habiger, Eugene E., Director, Office of Security and Emergency Operations, Department of Energy, Washington, DC, memorandum, December 27, 1999 207 Hatch, Hon. Orrin G., a U.S. Senator from the State of Utah, letter to Attorney General Reno, October 8, 1999 ............................................................ 253 Holscher, Mark, O’Melveny & Myers LLP, Los Angeles, CA: letter, December 10, 1999 ................................................................................ 124 letter and attachment ...................................................................................... 203 Hoskins, Carlton, memorandum to Senator Specter, September 26, 2000 ......... 74 Jennings, John P., Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legislative Affairs, Department of Justice, Washington, DC, letter to Sen- ator Hatch, October 25, 1999 .............................................................................. 255 Kalisch, Eleni P., Special Counsel, Office of Public and Congressional Affairs, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Department of Justice, Washington, DC, facsimile ................................................................................................................ 90 Keifer, Richard W., Keifer Group Investigations
Load more

Recommended publications
  • In United States District Court for the District of Columbia
    Case 1:13-cv-00851-RJL Document 13-1 Filed 10/29/13 Page 1 of 31 IN UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LARRY KLAYMAN, et. al Plaintiffs, v. BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA II, et. al Defendants. Civil Action No. 13-CV-851 PLAINTIFFS' MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION I. INTRODUCTION On June 9, 2013, Plaintiffs filed suit challenging the legality of Defendants’ secret and illicit government scheme to systematically gather, intercept and analyze vast quantities of domestic telephonic communications and “metadata” wholly within the United States by implementing a highly classified, unlawful mass call tracking surveillance program. Compl. ¶2. On April 25, 2013, Defendant Honorable Roger Vinson, a judge of the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (“FISC”), issued a top-secret order compelling the disclosure of all call detail records in possession of Verizon Telecommunication for analysis by the National Security Agency (“NSA”) on an ongoing daily basis.1 On June 5, 2013, based on the disclosures of whistleblower, Edward Snowden, who fled the United States for fear of government reprisal, The Guardian publicly revealed this previously classified order in an article entitled “NSA collecting phone records of millions of Verizon customers daily. Exclusive: Top secret order 1 Compl. ¶26; See, In re Application of the FBI for an Order Requiring the Production of Tangible Things from Verizon Bus. Network Servs., Inc. on Behalf of MCI Commc’n Servs., Inc. d/b/a Verizon Bus. Servs., No. BR 13-80 (FISA Ct. Apr. 25, 2013) (“Verizon Order”).
    [Show full text]
  • “Trade Secrets and Economic Espionage” Seminar
    Transcript: September 16 “Trade Secrets and Economic Espionage” Seminar HOLLY CHANG: Thank you, thank you for joining us today. My name is Holly Chang and I am the Acting Executive Director of the Committee of 100. If everyone could please make sure that your phones are off, we would greatly appreciate it. We’re really honored today to have with us two very courageous people, Ms. Sherry Chen and Professor Xiaoxing Xi, who will share their stories with us later today. We would like to commend them for their bravery to continue to speak out on these issues in D.C. today. We’re also very grateful to have with us two Committee of 100 members to share their expertise and experiences: Brian Sun, a renowned legal expert who has been involved in many, many cases, including that of Dr. Wen Ho Lee, and also Henry Tang, who co-founded the Committee of 100 25 years ago. We’re also joined by Peter Zeidenberg, Partner at Arent Fox, who represents Ms. Chen and Dr. Xi. We are also very honored to have here Congresswoman Grace Meng, U.S. Representative for New York’s 6th district. If Congresswoman Meng would like to make some remarks, we would welcome her to come up and speak at this time. CONGRESSWOMAN GRACE MENG: Thank you Holly and thank you to the Committee. It’s a wonderful privilege to be with you all today. I just want to thank all of you for putting together this very important event. We have votes later and it’s a very unpredictable first day, so thank you for bearing with us.
    [Show full text]
  • Befriending the •Œyellow Perilâ•Š: Chinese Students and Intellectuals and the Liberalization of US Immigration Laws
    Befriending the “Yellow Peril”: Chinese Students and Intellectuals and the Liberalization of U.S. Immigration Laws, 1950–1965 Madeline Y. Hsu University of Texas at Austin The extensive literature concerning America’s exclusion of Asians has emphasized primarily the domestic contexts for restricting trans-Pacific migrations. Fears of a “Yellow Peril” invasion and conquest were used to justify the earliest American attempts to limit the entry of races and nationalities deemed too different and incompatible to integrate and participate on equal terms in a republic dominated by European arrivals and their descendants. Asian American Studies scholars in particular have mined the rich vein of documents delineating the formative legacy of anti-Asian laws, ideologies, and institutions shaping the still deeply troubled patrolling of American borders today. Less attention has turned to the influence of foreign policy considerations and their role in carving out categories of migrants exempted from exclusionary laws. For ex- ample, the Chinese Exclusion Law of 1882 made exceptions for mer- chants, merchant family members, students and teachers, diplomats, and tourists. Those who retained rights to cross borders, often with fami- lies intact, demonstrate that considerations of class and cultural capital shaped immigration restrictions toward pragmatic and away from ra- cialist concerns. The genealogy of the exempt classes highlights how U.S. foreign policy goals came to operate in concert with modifications of immigration laws and policies so that by the mid-twentieth century, Congress was crafting immigration laws that could also further its dip- lomatic ends. In examining this relationship, I seek to explain more clearly the mid-twentieth-century diminishing of racial segregation and the re- fining of immigration restrictions—particularly during the Cold War era and culminating with the 1965 Immigration Act—and the seemingly The Journal of American–East Asian Relations, Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • The Wen Ho Lee Matter Joint Hearing
    THE WEN HO LEE MATTER JOINT HEARING BEFORE THE SELECT'COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE AND THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION THE WEN HO LEE MATTER SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 70-ME WASHINGTON: 2001 SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama, Chairman RICHARD H. BRYAN, Nevada, Vice Chairman RICHARD G. LUGAR, Indiana BOB GRAHAM, Florida JON KYL, Arizona JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma MAX BAUCUS, Montana ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah CHARLES S. ROBB, Virginia PAT ROBERTS, Kansas FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey WAYNE ALLARD, Colorado CARL LEVIN, Michigan CONNIE MACK, Florida TRENT LOTT, Mississippi, Ex Officio THOMAS A. DASCHLE, South Dakota, Ex Officio COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah, Chairman STROM THURMOND, South Carolina PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware JON KYL, Arizona HERB KOHL, Wisconsin MIKE DEWINE, Ohio DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California JOHN ASHCROFT, Missouri RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin SPENCER ABRAHAM, Michigan ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York BOB SMITH, New Hampshire (11) CONTENTS Page Hearing held in Washington, DC, September 26, 2000 . ........................................ 1 Statement of: Bay, Norman, C., U.S. Attorney, District of New Mexico ............. ................ 27 Bryan, Hon. Richard H., U.S. Senator from the State of Nevada ......... ....... 4 Freeh, Hon. Louis J., Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation .......... ....... 28 Glauthier, Hon. T.J., Deputy Secretary of Energy .................... .................... 42 Grassley, Hon. Charles E., U.S. Senator from the State of Iowa .......... ....... 13 Hatch, Hon.
    [Show full text]
  • Nota Bene, October 20, 2000
    George Washington University Law School Scholarly Commons Nota Bene, 2000 Nota Bene, 2000s 10-20-2000 Nota Bene, October 20, 2000 Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.gwu.edu/nota_bene_2000 Recommended Citation George Washington University Law School, 8 Nota Bene 5 (2000) This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Nota Bene, 2000s at Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Nota Bene, 2000 by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The George Washington Post Friday, October 20, 2000 Ml BENE Vol. 8, No. 5 Some of My Best Friends Are Asian. No, Really! Reno Makes No Apologies for Wen Ho Lee at NAPALSA Meeting° tion,. on Friday_ night at the C,apitol uHilton. „ . In a half-hour address, the Attorney Gen­ BY ANGELA HSU eral referred to the Wen Ho Lee case as "an Features Editor unfortunate incident." While refusing to go into the case further, stating that most in­ "Leadership and Community: Forg­ formation at this time was classified, she ing a New Path," was the title of this year's did vow to de-classify as much information National Asian Pacific American Law Stu­ as possible in order to "open up the lines of dents Association's law and public policy communication." Mr. Justice Breyer and his former Clerk, Mr. Professor Molot conlerence which took place from October Reno also stated that racial profiling 13th through the 15th. Law students from and selective prosecution are wrongful but as far as California and Texas convened on stopped short of calling the Wen Ho Lee Judicial Clerkship Meeting: the GW campus for this important event.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record—House H3600
    H3600 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Ð HOUSE May 25, 1999 Mr. MICA. I thank the gentleman. January of this year, and only now, FBI that asked the Justice Depart- f some 5, almost 6 months later, has this ment. report at long last been released to the Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I CHINESE ESPIONAGE American people. thank my colleague for correcting the The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. It has been a strength of our society record. I misspoke. The FBI asked the TANCREDO). Under the Speaker's an- that once we as a people recognize a Justice Department for the ability to nounced policy of January 6, 1999, the threat, we deal with that threat in a wiretap this individual because of the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. KING- responsible manner. And yet, Mr. threat to our national security. And in STON) is recognized until midnight. Speaker, it is difficult to do so at this all the wiretaps issued following our Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I wel- juncture in our history because of what constitutional procedures, this par- come the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. has been called, in common parlance, ticular wiretap was denied. This special HAYWORTH), and also invite the gen- ``spin''; what some used to call in the surveillance was denied. tleman from Florida (Mr. MICA) to join past ``smoke and mirrors.'' And while Couple that with the curious case of us. He is welcome to do so. my colleague pointed out that espio- a Chinese arms merchant suddenly Mr. Speaker, the biggest and the nage is nothing new, that different gaining clearance for the import into scariest espionage in the history of our countries observe and conduct surveil- this country of 100,000 weapons to be country has taken place, and many of lance on one another, the fact is that used on the streets of our inner cities the details were revealed today in the the disturbing information is some- where again the agency in charge Cox report.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Association for Diplomatic Studies and Training Foreign Affairs History
    Association for Diplomatic Studies and Training Foreign Affairs History Project HOWARD H. LANGE Interviewed by: Charles Stuart Kennedy Initial interview date: June 20, 2000 Copyright 2004 ADS TABLE OF CONTENTS Background Born and raised in Nebraska Uni ersity of Nebraska U.S. Air Force Taiwan - U.S. Air Force 1963-1967 Mainland China Uni ersity of ,ashington - Student 1967-1969 Entered Foreign Ser ice 1969 State Department - FS. - /ietnam Training 1969-1970 Dissent petition Hue1 /ietnam - Pacification Program 1970-1971 23am Son 7194 Tet En ironment 3aos Buddhists U.S. firms Saigon1 /ietnam - Political Officer 1972 En ironment Military situation Reporting the war U.S. military Ambassador Bunker Cease fire State Department - FS. - Economic Training 1972-1973 0 State Department - Office of Pacific .slands1 New 8ealand1 and Australia 1973-1975 South Pacific communism French Agricultural products Ronald Reagan Manila1 Philippines - Economic and Financial Officer 1975-1979 A.D Marcos U.S. interests :o ernment Taipei1 Taiwan - Chinese 3anguage Training 1979-1980 Beijing1 China - Economic Officer 1980-1982 Reporting problems Security En ironment Sichuan U.S. interests State Department - Regional Economic Affairs 1982-1983 State Department - EAP - China Desk Officer 1983-1985 Shipping Normalization of relationship Asian De elopment Bank [ADB] Reagan China isit Trading Ci il a iation Dam projects Chinese U.S. isitors State Department - FS. - Polish 3anguage Training 1986 ,arsaw1 Poland - Economic Counselor 1986-1989 Agriculture Solidarity Malta 1989-1992 Bush-:orbache summit 3ibya Pan-Am 103 :ulf ,ar 1 Economy State Department - Protection of .ntellectual Property Rights 1992-1994 ,orld .ntellectual Property Organization [,.PO] .ntellectual pri acy State Department - EAP - Taiwan Desk Officer 1994-1996 American .nstitute in Taiwan [A.T] Operating procedures Taiwan Policy Re iew Congressional interest Taipei representati es in ,ashington China relations 3ee Teng-hui@s Cornell Uni ersity isit 2Republic of China on TaiwanA Taiwan Relations Act Transit issue U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Casting Net Assessment Andrew W
    THE 16 DREW PER PA S Casting Net Assessment Andrew W. Marshall and the Epistemic Community of the Cold War John M. Schutte Lieutenant Colonel, USAF Air University Steven L. Kwast, Lieutenant General, Commander and President School of Advanced Air and Space Studies Thomas D. McCarthy, Colonel, Commandant and Dean AIR UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF ADVANCED AIR AND SPACE STUDIES Casting Net Assessment Andrew W. Marshall and the Epistemic Community of the Cold War John M. Schutte Lieutenant Colonel, USAF Drew Paper No. 16 Air University Press Air Force Research Institute Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama Project Editor Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Jeanne K. Shamburger Schutte, John M., 1976– Copy Editor Casting net assessment : Andrew W. Marshall and the epistemic Carolyn Burns community of the Cold War / John M. Schutte, Lieutenant Colonel, USAF. Cover Art, Book Design, and Illustrations pages cm. — (Drew paper ; no. 16) Daniel L. Armstrong Includes bibliographical references. Composition and Prepress Production ISBN 978-1-58566-240-1 (alk. paper) Nedra O. Looney 1. Marshall, Andrew W., 1921– 2. United States. Department of Defense. Director of Net Assessment—Biography. 3. United Print Preparation and Distribution States. Department of Defense—Officials and employees— Diane Clark Biography. 4 Rand Corporation—Biography. 5. United States— Forecasting. 6. Military planning—United States—History— 20th century. 7. Military planning—United States—History—21st century. 8. United States—Military policy. 9. Strategy. 10. Cold War. I. Title. II. Title: Andrew W. Marshall and the epistemic community of the Cold War. UA23.6.S43 2014 AIR FORCE RESEARCH INSTITUTE 355.0092—dc23 [B] AIR UNIVERSITY PRESS 2014035197 Director and Publisher Allen G.
    [Show full text]
  • View Complaint
    SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK Vincent Forras, on behalf of ) himself and all others of and in ) the City of New York, County ) of New York, similarly ) COMPLAINT situated, ) ) Index No. Plaintiff, ) v., ) ) Feisal Abdul Rauf, and ) Cordoba House/Park51, ) Cordoba Initiative, Soho ) Properties, and all other aliases ) known and unknown Defendants. FACTS COMMON TO ALLEGATIONS The Lead Plaintiff, Vincent Forras, and other members of the class similarly situated as set forth below, complain of the Defendants on behalf of himself and these other members of the class of the City of New York, County of New York, similarly situated, and alleges as follows: 1. Defendant Feisel Abdul Rauf (hereafter ―Feisel‖) is an individual and on information and belief, at all times mentioned herein resides in the City of New York, State of New York. 2. Defendant Cordoba House/Park51 is an entity whose true and correct form is unknown to the Lead Plaintiff at this time. On information and belief, at all times mentioned herein Cordoba House/Park51’s principal place of business is and was located at 51 Park Place, in the city of New York, State of New York. 3. Defendant Cordoba Initiative is an entity whose true and correct form is not fully known to the Lead Plaintiff and other members of the class at this time. On information and belief, at all times mentioned herein Cordoba Initiative’s principal place of business is and was located at 475 Riverside Drive, Suite 248 in the City of New York, State of New York.
    [Show full text]
  • The Early History of the Black Lives Matter Movement, and the Implications Thereof
    18 NEV. L.J. 1091, CHASE - FINAL 5/30/18 2:29 PM THE EARLY HISTORY OF THE BLACK LIVES MATTER MOVEMENT, AND THE IMPLICATIONS THEREOF Garrett Chase* INTRODUCTION From quarterbacks to hashtags, from mall demonstrations to community vigils, and from the streets of New York to the courts of Texas, the Black Lives Matter movement undisputedly has made its mark on America’s consciousness. But what is this “movement”? Where did it come from? Does Black Lives Mat- ter stand for civil rights, or human rights? What are the movement’s goals? What are its motivations? With the onslaught of media attention given to Black Lives Matter, I found the magnitude of these questions troubling. Black Lives Matter has garnered widespread awareness; yet, many know almost nothing about its origins. Black Lives Matter’s ultimate place in the historical narrative of our time is uncertain. Part viral social phenomenon, part civil rights move- ment, Black Lives Matter draws on common themes from previous civil rights movements, but is a marked departure from previous chapters of the centuries- long struggle for Black freedom and equality in America. As a matter of clarification, and with all due respect to those who were re- sponsible for the inception of the Black Lives Matter (“BLM”) movement, this Note addresses Black Lives Matter in the context of America’s history of civil rights movements. In an article for Time Magazine, one of the originators of the movement, Opal Tometi, specified that the aspirations of the movement go be- yond civil rights and that the movement characterizes itself as a human rights movement for “the full recognition of [Blacks’] rights as citizens; and it is a battle for full civil, social, political, legal, economic and cultural rights as en- * Associate Attorney at Shumway Van and William S.
    [Show full text]
  • Luhn-V-Scott.Pdf
    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LAURA WILLIS LUHN, Plaintiff, v. No. 19-cv-1180 (DLF) SUZANNE GUNDERSON SCOTT, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION Laura Luhn brings this suit against Fox News Network, LLC and its CEO, Suzanne Gunderson Scott. Compl., Dkt. 1. Luhn’s amended complaint asserts four causes of action against Fox News and Scott: (1) defamation; (2) defamation by implication; (3) false light invasion of privacy; and (4) intentional infliction of emotional distress. Am. Compl., Dkt. 15. Before the Court is the defendants’ motion to dismiss the amended complaint for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Mot. to Dismiss, Dkt. 16. For the reasons that follow, the Court will grant the defendants’ motion and dismiss the case. I. BACKGROUND1 A. Luhn’s History at Fox News Luhn began working for Fox News in 1996. Am. Compl. ¶ 31. She spent the next decade and a half enduring extensive and traumatic sexual abuse at the hands of Roger Ailes, the 1 The factual allegations below are drawn from Luhn’s amended complaint. See Banneker Ventures, LLC v. Graham, 798 F.3d 1119, 1129 (D.C. Cir. 2015) (court considering motion to dismiss must “accept all the well-pleaded factual allegations of the complaint as true and draw all reasonable inferences from those allegations in the plaintiff’s favor”). The Court has granted and considered Luhn’s Motion for Leave to File Surreply, Dkt. 19. former CEO of Fox News. See id. ¶ 33. According to Luhn’s complaint, Ailes “demanded, coerced, extorted, blackmailed and forced sexual favors from her.” Id.
    [Show full text]
  • Foreign Surveillance and the Future of Standing to Sue Post-Clapper
    . Foreign Surveillance and the Future of Standing to Sue Post-Clapper Andrew Nolan Legislative Attorney June 14, 2013 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R43107 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress c11173008 . Foreign Surveillance and the Future of Standing to Sue Post-Clapper Summary Recent news accounts (and government responses to those news accounts) have indicated that the government is reportedly engaged in a surveillance program that gathers vast amounts of data, including records regarding the phone calls, emails, and Internet usage of millions of individuals. The disclosures to the media reportedly suggest that specific telecommunication companies have been required to disclose certain data to the government as part of the intelligence community’s surveillance efforts. The recent controversy over the reports of government targeting efforts comes months after the Supreme Court ruled in a case called Clapper v. Amnesty International. In Clapper, the Court dismissed a facial constitutional challenge to section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act on constitutional standing grounds. Specifically, the Clapper court found that the litigants, a group of attorneys and human rights activists who argued that their communications with clients could be the target of foreign intelligence surveillance, could not demonstrate they would suffer a future injury that was “certainly impending,” the requirement the majority of the Court found to be necessary to establish constitutional standing when asking a court to prevent a future injury. Notwithstanding the Clapper decision, in light of the recent revelations about the government’s intelligence gathering methods, several lawsuits have been filed by individuals who are customers of the companies allegedly subject to court orders requiring the disclosure of data to the government.
    [Show full text]