Confirm favorite deletion?
Constitutional Law Keyed to Barnett
Clapper v. Amnesty International USA
Citation:568 U.S. 398 (2013)
Only StudyBuddy Pro offers the complete Case Brief Anatomy*
Access the most important case brief elements for optimal case understanding.
*Case Brief Anatomy includes: Brief Prologue, Complete Case Brief, Brief Epilogue
- The Brief Prologue provides necessary case brief introductory information and includes:
- Topic: Identifies the topic of law and where this case fits within your course outline.
- Parties: Identifies the cast of characters involved in the case.
- Procedural Posture & History: Shares the case history with how lower courts have ruled on the matter.
- Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.: A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.
- Case Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises: Identifies and Defines Legal Authority used in this case.
- The Case Brief is the complete case summarized and authored in the traditional Law School I.R.A.C. format. The Pro case brief includes:
- Brief Facts: A Synopsis of the Facts of the case.
- Rule of Law: Identifies the Legal Principle the Court used in deciding the case.
- Facts: What are the factual circumstances that gave rise to the civil or criminal case? What is the relationship of the Parties that are involved in the case. Review the Facts of this case here:
In 1978, Congress passed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, a law that allows the Attorney General and Director of National Intelligence to surveil individuals who are located outside of the United States and who are not “United States Persons.” Amendments to the FISA in 2008 removed an earlier requirement that the government establish probable cause that the target of the surveillance was a foreign power/agent of a foreign power. Respondents argued that the FISA interfered with their ability to communicate with their clients, who may be targeted by FISA. In addition to interference with their communications, Respondents claim that they were compelled to travel abroad to communicate with witnesses due to fear of surveillance, leading to costly and burdensome expenditures. Respondents argued that the FISA was an unconstitutional violation of their Fourth and First Amendment rights and violated Article III and separation of powers.
- Issue(s): Lists the Questions of Law that are raised by the Facts of the case.
- Holding: Shares the Court's answer to the legal questions raised in the issue.
- Concurring / Dissenting Opinions: Includes valuable concurring or dissenting opinions and their key points.
- Reasoning and Analysis: Identifies the chain of argument(s) which led the judges to rule as they did.
- The Brief Prologue closes the case brief with important forward-looking discussion and includes:
- Policy: Identifies the Policy if any that has been established by the case.
- Court Direction: Shares where the Court went from here for this case.