Privacy and Surveillance
FBI v. Fikre
Whether the government can overcome the voluntary cessation exception to mootness by removing an individual from the No Fly List when the government has not repudiated its decision to place him on the List and remains free to return him to the List for the same reasons and using the same procedures he alleges were unlawful.
Status: Ongoing
View Case
Learn About Privacy and Surveillance
Featured
U.S. Supreme Court
Apr 2022
Privacy and Surveillance
+2 Issues
FBI v. Fazaga
In a case scheduled to be argued before the U.S. Supreme Court on November 8, 2021, three Muslim Americans are challenging the FBI’s secret spying on them and their communities based on their religion, in violation of the Constitution and federal law. In what will likely be a landmark case, the plaintiffs — Yassir Fazaga, Ali Uddin Malik, and Yasser Abdelrahim — insist that the FBI cannot escape accountability for violating their religious freedom by invoking “state secrets.” The plaintiffs are represented by the Center for Immigration Law and Policy at UCLA School of Law, the ACLU of Southern California, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Council for American Islamic Relations, and the law firm of Hadsell Stormer Renick & Dai.
All Cases
37 Privacy and Surveillance Cases
Court Case
May 2023
Privacy and Surveillance
National Security
The Warrant Clause in the Digital Age
The information generated by today’s digital devices and online services reveals private matters far beyond what one could learn from physical analogs. In a series of legal filings and a white paper, available below, the ACLU has argued that to keep apace with technological developments and adequately protect our privacy, the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement must be interpreted robustly. Seizures and searches of digital data must be cabined to probable cause, limited to specific categories of information relevant to the investigation, and closely overseen by a neutral magistrate.
Explore case
Court Case
May 2023
Privacy and Surveillance
National Security
The Warrant Clause in the Digital Age
The information generated by today’s digital devices and online services reveals private matters far beyond what one could learn from physical analogs. In a series of legal filings and a white paper, available below, the ACLU has argued that to keep apace with technological developments and adequately protect our privacy, the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement must be interpreted robustly. Seizures and searches of digital data must be cabined to probable cause, limited to specific categories of information relevant to the investigation, and closely overseen by a neutral magistrate.
Court Case
Apr 2023
Privacy and Surveillance
National Security
ACLU v. FBI - FOIA Case for FBI Records Related to Nondisclosure Agreements for Cell Site Simulators
In 2021, the ACLU submitted a FOIA request to the FBI to determine whether the FBI has continued to require state and local law enforcement agencies to enter into nondisclosure agreements before purchasing or using cell site simulators. After appealing and suing, the ACLU finally obtained responsive records confirming that the FBI has continued to impose nondisclosure agreements on law enforcement agencies seeking to use the FBI’s cell site simulators.
Explore case
Court Case
Apr 2023
Privacy and Surveillance
National Security
ACLU v. FBI - FOIA Case for FBI Records Related to Nondisclosure Agreements for Cell Site Simulators
In 2021, the ACLU submitted a FOIA request to the FBI to determine whether the FBI has continued to require state and local law enforcement agencies to enter into nondisclosure agreements before purchasing or using cell site simulators. After appealing and suing, the ACLU finally obtained responsive records confirming that the FBI has continued to impose nondisclosure agreements on law enforcement agencies seeking to use the FBI’s cell site simulators.
U.S. Supreme Court
Feb 2023
Privacy and Surveillance
Wikimedia v. NSA - Challenge to Upstream Surveillance
The ACLU is challenging the constitutionality of the NSA’s mass interception and searching of Americans’ international Internet communications. At issue is the NSA’s “Upstream” surveillance, through which the U.S. government systematically monitors private emails, messages, and other data flowing into and out of the country on the Internet’s central arteries. The ACLU’s lawsuit was brought on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation and eight legal, human rights, and media organizations, which together engage in trillions of sensitive communications and have been harmed by Upstream surveillance.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Feb 2023
Privacy and Surveillance
Wikimedia v. NSA - Challenge to Upstream Surveillance
The ACLU is challenging the constitutionality of the NSA’s mass interception and searching of Americans’ international Internet communications. At issue is the NSA’s “Upstream” surveillance, through which the U.S. government systematically monitors private emails, messages, and other data flowing into and out of the country on the Internet’s central arteries. The ACLU’s lawsuit was brought on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation and eight legal, human rights, and media organizations, which together engage in trillions of sensitive communications and have been harmed by Upstream surveillance.
Court Case
Apr 2022
Privacy and Surveillance
U.S. v. Muhtorov
The ACLU and the Office of the Federal Public Defender of Colorado jointly represented Jamshid Muhtorov in challenging the warrantless surveillance of his communications under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), and the lawfulness of other spying methods the government used against him. Mr. Muhtorov was the first person ever to receive notice from the government that Section 702 had been used to spy on their communications. In a split decision in December 2021, the Tenth Circuit court of appeals ruled against Mr. Muhtorov.
Explore case
Court Case
Apr 2022
Privacy and Surveillance
U.S. v. Muhtorov
The ACLU and the Office of the Federal Public Defender of Colorado jointly represented Jamshid Muhtorov in challenging the warrantless surveillance of his communications under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), and the lawfulness of other spying methods the government used against him. Mr. Muhtorov was the first person ever to receive notice from the government that Section 702 had been used to spy on their communications. In a split decision in December 2021, the Tenth Circuit court of appeals ruled against Mr. Muhtorov.
U.S. Supreme Court
Nov 2021
Privacy and Surveillance
Free Speech
ACLU v. United States
The ACLU has filed three motions in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) asking it to release secret opinions authorizing the surveillance of Americans. The public has a right to see the legal decisions addressing novel surveillance programs that affect our privacy and free speech rights — but many of the FISC’s opinions remained closely guarded secrets.
After the FISC and its appeals court rejected the ACLU’s public access arguments in a series of rulings, the ACLU asked the Supreme Court to review those rulings and to recognize that the public has a First Amendment right of access to the FISC’s opinions.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Nov 2021
Privacy and Surveillance
Free Speech
ACLU v. United States
The ACLU has filed three motions in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) asking it to release secret opinions authorizing the surveillance of Americans. The public has a right to see the legal decisions addressing novel surveillance programs that affect our privacy and free speech rights — but many of the FISC’s opinions remained closely guarded secrets.
After the FISC and its appeals court rejected the ACLU’s public access arguments in a series of rulings, the ACLU asked the Supreme Court to review those rulings and to recognize that the public has a First Amendment right of access to the FISC’s opinions.