Document Actions
Mayfield v. United States of America
Title: Mayfield v. United States of America
Date: September 26, 2007
Author: Judge Ann Aiken
Institution: District Court - Oregon
Bibliographic Entry: Mayfield v. United States of America, 72 F. 186 (D. Or. Sep. 26, 2007).
Electronic Link: http://ord.uscourts.gov/rulings/04-cv-1427Opinion.pdf
Key Words: FISA, USA PATRIOT Act, constitutionality, civil rights, foreign surveillance, Fourth Amendment
Summary of Key Points, Issues, Conclusions:
In Mayfield v. United States, U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken (District of Oregon) held that parts of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978 (50 U.S.C. §§ 1804 and 1823), as amended by the Patriot Act, are unconstitutional because they violate the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. The case was brought by Brandon Mayfield, a who was put under extensive surveillance and then detained for two weeks because the FBI suspected him of involvement in the Madrid train bombing of 2004.
The court asserts that by allowing the Executive Branch to bypass the Fourth Amendment in gathering evidence for a criminal prosecution, the Patriot Act effectively eliminates that hard won legislative compromise previously embodied in FISA which reduced the probable cause requirement only for national security intelligence gathering. Moreover, the constitutionally required interplay between Executive action, Judicial decision, and Congressional enactment, has been eliminated by the FISA amendments. The court declines to adopt the analysis and conclusion reached by the FISCR in In re Sealed Case and declines to “in essence, amend the Bill of Rights.”
Name of Researcher: Katie Stout
Institution: Integrative Center for Homeland Security, Texas A&M University
Date Posted: October 4, 2007