Case: Ashcroft v. Al-Kidd

1:05-cv-00093 | U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho

Filed Date: March 15, 2005

Closed Date: 2015

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

The plaintiff in this action brought suit on 03/15/2005 against former Attorney General John Ashcroft and several other federal officials in their individual and official capacities, claiming that he was unlawfully detained and his freedom was otherwise infringed by the federal government. On March 16, 2003, the plaintiff, Al-Kidd, was arrested and detained as a material witness in a terrorism case in the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho. The underlying case was against another pe…

The plaintiff in this action brought suit on 03/15/2005 against former Attorney General John Ashcroft and several other federal officials in their individual and official capacities, claiming that he was unlawfully detained and his freedom was otherwise infringed by the federal government.

On March 16, 2003, the plaintiff, Al-Kidd, was arrested and detained as a material witness in a terrorism case in the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho. The underlying case was against another person, for visa fraud and false statements to U.S. Officials. Al-Kidd was held for 15 days in several different detention centers and treated as a terrorist suspect. On March 31, 2003, the Court ordered the plaintiff released on the condition that he live with his wife at her parents' home in Nevada. The Court confiscated his passport, barred him from applying for a new one and limited his travel to four states. He was required to report to probation officers and subjected to home visits. The plaintiff's material witness warrant was only dismissed 15 months later, when the defendant in the terrorist trial was acquitted of all major charges.

In a complaint filed in the District of Idaho on March 14, 2005, the plaintiff alleged that his treatment was part of a policy of the United States government in the aftermath of September 11, 2001 to use the federal material witness statute in an unlawful manner. The plaintiff stated that individuals were arrested on material witness warrants without probable cause that they had information germane to a criminal proceeding, and were unnecessarily detained for long periods of time in poor conditions. The material witness statute was used to hold suspected terrorists when the government had not established probable cause to arrest the individual for a crime. The plaintiff claimed that his treatment violated the Bail Reform Act (18 U.S.C. § 3144), the Fourth Amendment and Fifth Amendments of the US Constitution, and constituted unlawful arrest and detention under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The plaintiff sought declaratory relief, expungement of all records relating to his unlawful arrest, and compensatory and punitive damages. The plaintiff was represented by private counsel and the ACLU.

On January 23, 2006, the defendants filed three separate motions to dismiss. In his motion to dismiss, the Alexandria, Virginia, sheriff responsible for the plaintiff while in custody at the Alexandria Detention Center, alleged lack of personal jurisdiction in the Idaho District Court. On July 19, 2006, the claims against the sheriff were severed and transferred to the Eastern District of Virginia and his motion was subsequently denied as moot. The United States filed a motion to dismiss that was denied except as to the plaintiff's claim of false imprisonment based upon the delay in his transfer. The court found there was no basis for the false imprisonment claim because the plaintiff was arrested pursuant to a lawfully issued material witness warrant and because constitutional claims are not cognizable under the Federal Tort Claims Act.

Former Attorney General John Ashcroft, the former warden of the Oklahoma Federal Transfer Center, and several FBI agents (known collectively as the "Federal Defendants") filed a separate motion to dismiss. The Federal Defendants argued that the court lacked personal jurisdiction over Ashcroft and the warden, that Ashcroft was entitled to absolute prosecutorial immunity as to plaintiff's arrest under the material witness warrant, that the Federal Defendants were entitled to qualified immunity, and that there was no private right of action under 18 U.S.C. §§ 3142 and 3144. The District Court of Idaho (Judge Edward J. Lodge) denied this motion to dismiss.

On November 27, 2006, John Ashcroft appealed the denial of his motion to dismiss. Ashcroft argued that he was entitled to absolute prosecutorial immunity as to the §3144 and Fourth Amendment claims and that he was entitled to qualified immunity from liability from all three claims. In a September 4, 2009, opinion, the Ninth Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part the District of Idaho's ruling. The Ninth Circuit reversed the ruling as to the plaintiff's Conditions of Confinement claim, holding that the plaintiff had not alleged adequate facts to render plausible Ashcroft's personal involvement in setting the harsh conditions of his confinement. On all other claims the Ninth Circuit affirmed the District Court order denying Ashcroft's motion to dismiss. 580 F.3d 949 (9th Cir. 2009)

The U.S. Supreme Court then granted certiorari and, in a May 31, 2011, opinion written by Justice Scalia, reversed. The Supreme Court found that the Ninth Circuit erred in considering Attorney General Ashcroft's subjective intent for detaining Al-Kidd under the material witness statute. The Supreme Court held that Ashcroft had not violated clearly established law and thus was entitled to qualified immunity. The case was remanded to the Ninth Circuit for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court decision. 131 S.Ct. 2074.

On remand, on August 3, 2011, the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's denial of Ashcroft's motion to dismiss and remanded the matter to the district court for proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court's Opinion. Al-Kidd v. Ashcroft, 653 F.3d 982 (9th Cir. 2011).

On remand, both the plaintiff and the two FBI agent moved for summary judgment. On June 18, 2012, Magistrate Judge Mikel Williams of the District of Idaho issued a report and recommendation on the cross motions for summary judgment. Judge Williams recommended that the plaintiff's motion be granted with respect to the first FBI agent and that the defendant's motion be denied. With respect to the second FBI agent, Judge Williams concluded that additional factual review need to occur before he could decide if the second FBI agent was not entitled to qualified immunity. Al-Kidd v. Gonzales, No. 1:05-CV-00093-EJL, 2012 WL 4470852 (D. Idaho June 18, 2012).

The plaintiff and the US also cross-moved for summary judgment on the claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act. On June 26, 2012, Judge Williams issued a report and recommendation that the plaintiff's motion be granted in part and denied in part. Judge Williams granted the motion for his false imprisonment claims, but denied the motion for his abuse of process claim. Judge Williams denied the US's motion completely. Al-Kidd v. Gonzales, No. 1:05-CV-00093-EJL, 2012 WL 4470860 (D. Idaho June 26, 2012).

On September 27, 2012, District Judge Edward Lopez reviewed Judge Williams's report and recommendations for the claims against the two FBI agents. Judge Lopez granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment as to the first FBI agent, but denied the plaintiff's motion as to the second FBI agent. Judge Lopez granted the second FBI agent's motion for summary judgment. Al-Kidd v. Gonzales, No. 1:05-CV-093-EJL-MHW, 2012 WL 4470776 (D. Idaho Sept. 27, 2012). Judge Lopez also reviewed Judge Williams's report and recommendations for the claim against the U.S. Judge Lopez affirmed Judge Williams's recommendation, granting in part and denying in part the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and denying the defendant's motion for summary judgment. Al-Kidd v. Gonzales, No. 1:05-CV-093-EJL-MHW, 2012 WL 4470782, at *6 (D. Idaho Sept. 27, 2012).

The first FBI agent appealed the denial of qualified immunity. However, the parties reached a settlement agreement on December 30, 2014. On January 6, 2015, the parties entered a joint motion to dismiss the appeal. On January 13, 2015, the parties a entered a joint motion to dismiss all remaining claims and stipulated that the court would retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement. The agreement itself was not shared with the court. According to an ACLU press release, the government agreed to pay Al-Kidd $385,000.

Summary Authors

David Priddy (9/28/2011)

Jessica Kincaid (2/19/2015)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attrorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4673700/parties/al-kidd-v-united-states/


Judge(s)

Alarcón, Arthur Lawrence (California)

Bea, Carlos T. (California)

Dale, Candy W. (Idaho)

Ginsburg, Ruth Bader (District of Columbia)

Ikuta, Sandra Segal (California)

Kennedy, Anthony McLeod (District of Columbia)

Lodge, Edward J. (Idaho)

Pregerson, Harry (California)

Scalia, Antonin (District of Columbia)

Smith, Milan Dale Jr. (California)

Judge(s)

Alarcón, Arthur Lawrence (California)

Bea, Carlos T. (California)

Dale, Candy W. (Idaho)

Ginsburg, Ruth Bader (District of Columbia)

Ikuta, Sandra Segal (California)

Kennedy, Anthony McLeod (District of Columbia)

Lodge, Edward J. (Idaho)

Pregerson, Harry (California)

Scalia, Antonin (District of Columbia)

Smith, Milan Dale Jr. (California)

Sotomayor, Sonia (District of Columbia)

Tashima, Atsushi Wallace (California)

Williams, Mikel H. (Idaho)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Anello, Farrin R (New York)

Bhandari, Esha (New York)

Cooper, Lea C. (Idaho)

Desormeau, Katherine (California)

Elliott, Kathleen J. (Idaho)

Eppink, Richard Allen (Idaho)

Gelernt, Lee (New York)

Goldfaden, Robin Lisa (California)

Guttentag, Lucas (California)

Hampton, Teresa A. (Idaho)

Ladin, Dror (New York)

Levine, Brant S. (District of Columbia)

Moghadam, Tanaz (New York)

O'Neil, David A. (District of Columbia)

Roark, R. Keith (Idaho)

Shapiro, Steven R. (New York)

Sturgill, Lowell V. Jr. (District of Columbia)

Tan, Michael K. T. (New York)

Van Valkenburgh, Jack (Idaho)

Wishnie, Michael J. (Connecticut)

Woolley, Cynthia (Idaho)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Bower, Greg H. (Idaho)

Christian, Forrest (District of Columbia)

Clark, Merlyn W (Idaho)

Collette, Matthew M. (District of Columbia)

Damle, Sarang V. (District of Columbia)

Jorgensen, Lorna K. (Idaho)

Katyal, Neal Kumar (District of Columbia)

Lammens, Philip (District of Columbia)

Loeb, Robert Mark (District of Columbia)

Meeks, J Marcus (District of Columbia)

Morgan, Sherry A. (Idaho)

Ravel, Ann Miller (California)

Reading, Julie D. (Idaho)

Other Attorney(s)

Bibas, Stephanos (Pennsylvania)

Drimmer, Jonathan C. (District of Columbia)

Handman, Christopher Todd (District of Columbia)

Marcu, Aaron R. (New York)

Oliver, Wesley MacNeil (Pennsylvania)

Russell, Kevin K. (District of Columbia)

Samp, Richard A. (District of Columbia)

Tringali, Joseph (New York)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

10-00098

Supreme Court Docket

Supreme Court of the United States

July 5, 2011

July 5, 2011

Docket

12-35957

Docket

Abdullah Al-Kidd v. Michael Gneckow, et al

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Dec. 19, 2013

Dec. 19, 2013

Docket

1:05-cv-00093

Docket

Al-Kidd v. United States

Jan. 13, 2015

Jan. 13, 2015

Docket
1

1:05-cv-00093

Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial

Al-Kidd v. Gonzales

2008 WL 975750

March 14, 2005

March 14, 2005

Complaint
33

1:05-cv-00093

Answer and Demand for Jury Trial Plaintiff

Al-Kidd v. Gonzales

2005 WL 2868047

Sept. 26, 2005

Sept. 26, 2005

Pleading / Motion / Brief
48-1

1:05-cv-00093

Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Federal Defendants' Motion to Dismiss

Al-Kidd v. Gonzales

2006 WL 417046

Jan. 23, 2006

Jan. 23, 2006

Pleading / Motion / Brief
63

1:05-cv-00093

Opposition to Federal Defendants' Motion to Dismiss

Al-Kidd v. Gonzales

March 15, 2006

March 15, 2006

Pleading / Motion / Brief
79

1:05-cv-00093

District Court Opinion

Al-Kidd v. Gonzales

2006 WL 5429570, 2006 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 70283

Sept. 27, 2006

Sept. 27, 2006

Order/Opinion

06-36059

Ninth Circuit Opinion

Al-Kidd v. Ashcroft

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

580 F.3d 949

Sept. 4, 2009

Sept. 4, 2009

Order/Opinion

1:05-cv-00093

Petition For Rehearing En Banc

Al-Kidd v. Ashcroft

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Oct. 19, 2009

Oct. 19, 2009

Pleading / Motion / Brief

Resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4673700/al-kidd-v-united-states/

Last updated Aug. 4, 2022, 3:11 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
74

ORDER denying as moot 51 Motion to Dismiss; Pla's request for transfer of venue is granted. The claims against Dft Dunning are severed and transferred to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Alexandria Division . Signed by Judge Edward J. Lodge. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by dks, )

July 19, 2006

July 19, 2006

RECAP
77

ORDER approving 76 Notice of Substitution of attorney within the Dept of Justice filed by the Federal Dfts and the USA; J. Marcus Meeks is to be substituted for Forrest Christian as counsel of record for the Federal Dfts and the USA. Signed by Judge Edward J. Lodge. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by dks, )

Sept. 6, 2006

Sept. 6, 2006

RECAP
78

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 49 Motion to Dismiss; The motion is denied except as to the Pla's claim of false imprisonment based upon the delay in his transfer . Signed by Judge Edward J. Lodge. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by dks, )

Sept. 18, 2006

Sept. 18, 2006

RECAP
79

ORDER denying 47 Motion to Dismiss, denying 55 Motion to Dismiss, granting 58 Motion to Substitute Party. Dennis M Callahan terminated and substituted dft John Sugrue, Former Warden, Oklahoma Federal Transfer Center; The Government is granted leave to file a motion to dismiss as to dft Surgue on or before 10/30/06 . Signed by Judge Edward J. Lodge. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by dks, )

Sept. 27, 2006

Sept. 27, 2006

RECAP
201

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 176 Motion to Compel; granting 191 Motion for Leave to File McJunkin declaration in camera. Signed by Judge Mikel H. Williams. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by dks, )

Dec. 10, 2007

Dec. 10, 2007

RECAP
230

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS denying as moot 139 Motion to Compel Discovery from Def. Killeen; granting 146 Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 149 Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment. Objections to R&R due by 3/3/2008. Signed by Judge Mikel H. Williams. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by jlg, )

Feb. 13, 2008

Feb. 13, 2008

RECAP
248

MEMORANDUM ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 230 Report and Recommendations, finding as moot 139 Motion to Compel, filed by Abdullah Al-Kidd, denying 146 Motion for Summary Judgment, filed by Vaughn Killeen, granting 149 Motion fo r Summary Judgment filed by Abdullah Al-Kidd; All the counts against dft Killeen are dismissed. A judgment shall be entered in favor of dft Killeen on all counts. Signed by Judge Edward J. Lodge. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by dks)

July 17, 2008

July 17, 2008

RECAP
249

MEMORANDUM ORDER denying 213 Motion for Reconsideration ; denying 246 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Judge Edward J. Lodge. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by dks)

July 17, 2008

July 17, 2008

RECAP
250

JUDGMENT in favor of Vaughn Killeen against Abdullah Al-Kidd. Signed by Judge Edward J. Lodge. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by dks)

July 17, 2008

July 17, 2008

RECAP
267

SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER denying 176 Motion to Compel as it relates to the FISA Documents. Parties are advised to comply with the requirements of the Court's 226 Order. Signed by Judge Mikel H. Williams. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by jlg)

Dec. 4, 2008

Dec. 4, 2008

RECAP
336

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT- It is Recommended that Plaintiff's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 310 ) as to Agent Gneckow be GRANTED; that Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 306 ) a s to Agent Gneckow be DENIED; and that as to Agent Mace, Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 306 ) and Plaintiff's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgement (Dkt. 310 ) be decided by the District Court following DE NOVO REVIEW. Objections to R&R due by 7/5/2012. Signed by Judge Mikel H. Williams. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (ja)

June 18, 2012

June 18, 2012

RECAP
337

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT- UNITED STATES- It is hereby recommended that Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment Against the United States (Dkt. 308 ) be DENIED IN PART AND GRANTED IN PART, and Defend ant United States Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 307 ) be DENIED. Objections to R&R due by 7/13/2012. Signed by Judge Mikel H. Williams. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (ja)

June 26, 2012

June 26, 2012

RECAP
350

ORDER ADOPTING 336 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ; granting in part and denying in part 306 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting in part and denying in part 310 Motion for Summary Judgment;. Signed by Judge Edward J. Lodge. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (dks)

Sept. 27, 2012

Sept. 27, 2012

RECAP
351

ORDER ADOPTING 337 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ; denying 307 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting in part and denying in part 308 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Edward J. Lodge. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (dks)

Sept. 27, 2012

Sept. 27, 2012

RECAP

Case Details

State / Territory: Idaho

Case Type(s):

Policing

Special Collection(s):

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: March 15, 2005

Closing Date: 2015

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

An American citizen detained as a witness in a terrorism case and thereafter given limited travel privileges under a material witness warrant.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

ACLU National (all projects)

ACLU Immigrants' Rights Project

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Attorney General of the United States (Washington), Federal

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Constitutional Clause(s):

Due Process

Unreasonable search and seizure

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Any published opinion

U.S. Supreme Court merits opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: None Yet / None

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Voluntary Dismissal

Issues

General:

False arrest