American GovernmentAbe/Davey
TRIAL OF Nima Hamideh & Tasha Simpson
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether or not two Saratoga High School student’s constitutionally protected habeas corpus and Fourth Amendment rights have been violated by the government
Case Background: On September 4th 2007, Tasha Simpson and Nima Hamidah traveled to Sacramento to compete in a state level high school debate competition. On the night of their arrival, they attended a dinner for the charity organization entitled Children of the Middle East. They were moved by the presentation. They subsequently joined the organization and contributed $100 each. The State Department, through months of intensive investigation, determined that the Children of the Middle East organization was a front organization that provided funds to Al Qaeda to support terrorism against the U.S.
Two weeks after Tasha and Nima joined the organization, the FBI conducted a search of both students’ residence without a warrant and found extensive fund raising literature from the organization. Two days later, the government tapped Nima’s call to Musaf Mubarak who is president of Children of the Middle East yet also a suspected terrorist. This wiretapping was conducted without receiving court oversight or approval under Protect America Act (S. 1927). The government arrested both Tasha (a non-citizen) and Nima (citizen) the next day (September 21st). Due to the provisions in the MCA, the government did not allow Tasha a lawyer or a trial. Nima was stripped of his citizenship due to Provision 802 in the U.S.A. PATRIOT and declared and enemy combatant. They are both being held separately in a military brig in Virginia Beach.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which the prosecution represents, has brought this case to the Supreme Court on appeal from the 9th Circuit Court. The ACLU's stated mission is "to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to every person in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States"
Main Argument:
Prosecution: The MCA and certain provisions of the Protect America Act, and U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act are unconstitutional.
Government: The MCA, Protect America Act, and the U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act save lives and are necessary laws and within the Constitutional bounds laid out by the founding fathers. The Government will argue that “the Constitution is not a suicide pact.”
In the Court: Here is where the class comes in with the case before the “court of last resort” The courtroom will appear like the real supreme court as much as possible. Layout and procedure can be found at The case will be tried in the United States Supreme Court which will include nine (9) justices, the courtroom officials and the presenting lawyers. The students will volunteer for roles and then will be selected by the teacher to play the following parts.
Actors/Court Officials:
Media/the accused: Nima Hamideh & Tasha Simpson and several reporters/actors-Saratoga High School students, (declared enemy combatants with the desire to commit a terrorist act. Defendants should get together with a small group and “recreate the event” as if it were the headline report on a program like “Dateline NBC” news. It should include recreations of the computer incident at the student’s home, the government raid, the arrest and “actual footage” of the failure to have an original jurisdiction trial. It should also include a pro-con section on the Patriot Act/MCA in general, and a current update on the “Continued Threat of Terror”. The video is due the day before the trial begins. You may reserve computers in the Saratoga Social Studies department if needed for editing.
Judges (9) - Will dress the part and are expected to follow American Supreme Court procedures and keep order in the court. Justices may ask questions and will be expected to adjudicate the case making a conclusion based on previous Supreme Court decisions and the Constitution of the United States. Each judge will represent (and create a nice placard) a real justice on the Supreme Court. By ______each justice will right a 2-page biography describing your justice’s background, viewpoint, and typical behavior during oral arguments. Immediately after the trial the justices will vote (partially based on their opinion of the trial and partially based on the way they think their justice might have voted). Decisions need not be unanimous. EACH JUSTICE will then write a 2 page brief on their decision regarding the case whether in the minority or majority (explaining their vote). This decision should then be put together into a group majority decision which flows together and has ample samples from previous court cases. Here is a full text sample of a case summary: and a key point version
Bailiff (1) - Expected to act as an officer of the court and the courtroom clerk. You must set up (and decorate the courtroom) to make it appear as much as possible like the real supreme court appears and write a paper which explains the supreme court process. Please give a detailed diagram to the teacher the day before the trial commences explaining the classroom design you intend to create.
Prosecution Lawyers (2)- Will be composed of a Lead Attorney who will complete an appeal to the Supreme Court and another attorney who will give 12 minute oral arguments (note much of this time will be spent answering questions!) before the court Though the appeal will be automatically accepted by the rule of 4, do not skimp on the appeal. Make sure to include court cases that add to your side and made a strong case. Your main argument is that the Military Commissions Act of 2006 and certain provisions of the U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act are unconstitutional.
Make sure to view procedures and listen to samples of oral arguments prior to the trial
To hear some example arguments go to
To view recent Briefs made to the Supreme Court
- evans
To view recent briefs go to
Prosecution Paralegal (1)- Paralegals do much of the research casework and receive little of the eventual credit. However, in this case the paralegal will be a pseudo-lawyer who will have the ability to answer questions from the justices. Make sure you handle all the necessary little things, like the appearance of Counsel @
Government Attorneys (2)- Will be composed of a Lead Attorney who will complete oral arguments before the court and a second lawyer who will give a 12 minute oral arguments (note much of this time will be spent answering questions!)Your main argument is that section 215 of the Patriot Act is constitutional and not in violation of the petitioner’s 4th Amendment right. You are lawyers for the government/people. To view procedures of oral arguments see
To hear some example arguments go to
To view recent Briefs made to the Supreme Court
- evans
To view recent briefs go to
Prosecution Paralegal (1)- Paralegals do much of the research casework and receive little of the eventual credit. However, in this case the paralegal will be a pseudo-lawyer who will have the ability to answer questions from the justices. Make sure you handle all the necessary little things, like the appearance of Counsel @ .
Interests Groups: They usually submit Amicus Briefs on behalf of one side or another during important Supreme Court cases. These amicus curiae (friend of the court briefs) are written reports (from the perspective of the group), which try and persuade the justices that their views are correct. Some of you will write briefs as if you were members of these groups. Your briefs should be submitted before the trial and are do on ______. Style for your essay can be obtained @
Groups Will include:
Pro Defendant:
• The American Civil Liberties Union see, but don’t copy:
• The American Library Association
• CATO Institute
•Arab-American Anti-Discrimination League
Also see
•World Tamil Coordinating Committee of New York
Pro Government
• Department of Justice (Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and subsequent links)
• Former Attorney General John Ashcroft
•Heritage Foundation
•John Yoo- from the American Enterprise Institute (this has both a video and the transcript)
• U.S. attorney Gregory Lockhart
• Hudson Institute
Prepared Remarks of Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales at the JAG Corps Leadership Summit-Lake Buena Vista, Florida October 23, 2006
Wiretap Debacle
How politics has gutted the terrorist surveillance program. (WSJ Staff Editorial)
Jose Padilla Makes Bad Law
Terror trials hurt the nation even when they lead to convictions. MICHAEL B. MUKASEY district judge- signed the material witness warrant authorizing Jose Padilla's arrest in 2002
Ashcroft: Critics of new terror measures undermine effort (Ashcroft- Pro Patriot Act)
President Bush Discusses Creation of Military Commissions to Try Suspected Terrorists
Basic Information on the Patriot Act can be obtained at
and
Very helpful chart at
Basic Information on the Military Commissions Act
Check out the trial roles @ the forum: