Lexplug logoLexplug

El-Masri v. United States

United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
479 F.3d 296 (2007)
ELI5:

Rule of Law:

A civil action must be dismissed on the pleadings if the very subject matter of the litigation is a state secret, making it impossible for the plaintiff to establish a prima facie case or for the defendant to assert a defense without disclosing privileged information that would harm national security.


Facts:

  • On December 31, 2003, Khaled El-Masri, a German citizen of Lebanese descent, was detained by law enforcement officials while traveling in Macedonia.
  • After being held in Macedonian custody for twenty-three days, El-Masri was handed over to operatives of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).
  • The CIA operatives allegedly beat, drugged, bound, and blindfolded El-Masri before flying him to a CIA-operated detention facility near Kabul, Afghanistan.
  • El-Masri was held incommunicado in this facility until May 28, 2004, during which time he was confined in an unsanitary cell and interrogated several times.
  • El-Masri alleged his abduction was part of an unlawful CIA policy known as 'extraordinary rendition,' devised by Director George Tenet, and that corporate defendants provided the aircraft used for his transport.
  • Upon his release, El-Masri was transported to Albania and abandoned in a remote area, from which he eventually returned to his home in Germany.

Procedural Posture:

  • Khaled El-Masri filed a civil action against former CIA Director George Tenet, three corporate defendants, and several unnamed employees in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.
  • The United States intervened as a defendant in the case.
  • The U.S. government formally asserted the state secrets privilege, supported by classified and unclassified declarations from the Director of the CIA.
  • Contending that the privilege precluded litigation of the claims, the United States moved to dismiss the Complaint.
  • The district court granted the United States' motion and dismissed El-Masri's Complaint in its entirety.
  • El-Masri (appellant) appealed the dismissal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.

Locked

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Does the state secrets doctrine require the dismissal of a civil action against government officials and private contractors for alleged extraordinary rendition when litigating the claim would inevitably risk disclosing classified information central to the case?


Opinions:

Majority - King, Circuit Judge

Yes. The state secrets doctrine requires dismissal because the litigation is so pervaded by classified information that it cannot proceed without threatening national security. To establish a prima facie case, El-Masri would need to produce admissible evidence about how the CIA organizes, staffs, and supervises its most sensitive intelligence operations, including the roles of specific individuals and contractors. Likewise, the defendants could not mount a defense—whether by denying the events occurred, denying their involvement, or justifying their actions—without revealing privileged information about intelligence means and methods. The court found that public discussion of rendition does not declassify the specific operational details needed to litigate the case, and therefore, the very subject matter of the suit is a state secret, mandating dismissal.



Analysis:

This decision powerfully reaffirms the judiciary's deference to the executive branch on matters of national security under the state secrets doctrine. It clarifies that even in cases alleging egregious constitutional violations, the courts will dismiss the action entirely if the central facts are inextricably linked to classified information. The ruling establishes that widespread media coverage and public acknowledgement of a general program (like 'rendition') do not waive the government's privilege over specific operational details. This precedent significantly limits the ability of plaintiffs to seek judicial remedy for harms resulting from clandestine intelligence activities, effectively placing such activities beyond the reach of civil litigation.

🤖 Gunnerbot:
Query El-Masri v. United States (2007) directly. You can ask questions about any aspect of the case. If it's in the case, Gunnerbot will know.
Locked
Subscribe to Lexplug to chat with the Gunnerbot about this case.

Unlock the full brief for El-Masri v. United States