{"id":263302,"date":"2022-03-08T17:00:59","date_gmt":"2022-03-08T11:30:59","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=263302"},"modified":"2022-03-25T10:26:12","modified_gmt":"2022-03-25T04:56:12","slug":"does-section-1806f-of-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-override-the-state-secrets-privilege","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/08\/does-section-1806f-of-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-override-the-state-secrets-privilege\/","title":{"rendered":"Does Section 1806(f) of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act override the state secrets privilege? SCOTUS explains"},"content":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court of the United States: <\/strong>Alito, J., while explaining whether Section 1806(f) of FISA would apply to a case when dealt with charging a specific individual or to challenging methods of surveillance of FBI remarked that,<\/p>\n

\n

Section 1806(f) is most likely to come into play when the Government seeks to use FISA evidence in a judicial or administrative proceeding, and the Government will obviously not invoke the state secrets privilege to block disclosure of information that it wishes to use.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

In the present matter, Supreme Court considered the relationship between the longstanding \u201cstate secrets\u201d privilege and a provision of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) which provides a procedure under which a trial-level court or other authority may consider the legality of electronic surveillance conducted under FISA and may thereafter order specified forms of relief.<\/p>\n

The above-stated case was brought in Federal Court by three Muslim residents of Southern California who alleged that the Federal Bureau of Investigation illegally surveilled them and others under FISA because of their religion.<\/p>\n

The government had invoked the state secrets privilege and asked the District Court to dismiss most of the respondents\u2019 claims because the disclosure of counter-intelligence information that was vital to an evaluation of those claims would threaten national-security interests.<\/p>\n

This Court repeatedly recognized \u201ca government privilege against court-ordered disclosure of state and military secrets\u201d.<\/p>\n

Crux<\/span><\/h4>\n

Whether FISA affects the availability or scope of that long-established privilege?<\/p>\n

Background<\/span><\/h4>\n

Respondents were members of Muslim communities in southern California who claimed that the Federal Bureau of Investigation illegally surveilled them because of their religion.<\/p>\n

Further, it was alleged that the FBI directed a confidential informant to \u201cgather information on Muslims in an indiscriminate manner\u201d. The said informant had infiltrated a Muslim community and gathered \u201chundreds of phone numbers and thousands of email addresses of Muslims\u201d \u201chundreds of hours of video recordings\u201d made inside mosques, homes, and other private locations; and \u201cthousands of hours of audio recording of conversations\u201d and of \u201cpublic discussion groups, classes, and lectures.\u201d<\/p>\n

In addition to the above, respondents alleged that the surveillance operation ended when the informant began asking members of the community about violent jihad, <\/em>and some of those individuals reported the informant to the FBI and his local police.<\/p>\n

In the present matter, much of the argumentation in this Court concerned the correct interpretation of \u00a71806(f).<\/p>\n

Respondents did not dispute that \u00a71806(f) applies when the Government seeks to introduce evidence and a private party seeks to prevent such use, but they argued that \u00a71806(f) is also sometimes triggered when \u201ca civil litigant seeks to obtain such secret information.\u201d<\/p>\n

Analysis and Conclusion<\/span><\/h4>\n

Court stated that regardless of whether the state secrets privilege is rooted only in the common law (as respondents argue) or also in the Constitution (as the Government argues), the privilege should not be held to have been abrogated or limited unless Congress has at least used clear statutory language.<\/p>\n

Bench opined that it seemed clear that the state secrets privilege would not be invoked in the great majority of cases in which \u00a71806(f) is triggered.<\/p>\n

\n

Section 1806(f ) is most likely to come into play when the Government seeks to use FISA evidence in a judicial or administrative proceeding, and the Government will obviously not invoke the state secrets privilege to block disclosure of information that it wishes to use.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Under \u00a71806(f ), the central question is the lawfulness of surveillance. Courts are instructed to determine \u201cwhether the surveillance of the aggrieved person was lawfully authorized and conducted.\u201d<\/p>\n

Supreme Court expressed when the state secrets privilege is asserted, the central question is not whether the evidence in question was lawfully obtained but whether its disclosure would harm national security interests.<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cWe have never suggested that an assertion of the state secrets privilege can be defeated by showing that the evidence was unlawfully obtained.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Elaborating more on Section 1806(f), Court explained that, the procedures used to evaluate assertions of the state secrets privilege may also, in some circumstances, be more protective of information than the procedures prescribed by \u00a71806(f). Subsection (f) allows \u201creview in camera and ex parte\u201d of materials that are \u201cnecessary to determine\u201d whether the surveillance was lawful. Nothing in that sub-section expressly provides that the Government may shield highly classified information from review by the judge if the information is \u201cnecessary\u201d to the determination of the legality of the surveillance.<\/p>\n

Therefore, Court concluded that Congress did not eliminate, curtail or modify the state secrets privilege when it enacted Section 1806(f).<\/p>\n

Significantly, the Bench addressed whether \u00a71806(f) displaces the state secrets privilege. It was concluded that the said section does not have the effect under either party\u2019s interpretation of the statute, nor does the Court decide whether the Government\u2019s evidence was privileged or whether the District Court was correct to dismiss respondents\u2019 claims o the pleadings.<\/p>\n

Lastly, the Bench held that the case has been remanded for further proceedings. [Federal Bureau of Investigation v. Fazaga, 2022 SCC OnLine US SC 1<\/b><\/a>, decided on 4-3-2022]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court of the United States: Alito, J., while explaining whether Section 1806(f) of FISA would apply to a case when dealt <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":32691,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,12],"tags":[48820,48818,30014,48819,27474],"class_list":["post-263302","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-foreigncourts","tag-fbi","tag-military-secrets","tag-scotus","tag-state-secrets","tag-surveillance"],"yoast_head":"\nDoes Section 1806(f) of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act override the state secrets privilege? SCOTUS explains | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Does Section 1806(f) of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act override the state secrets privilege?\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/08\/does-section-1806f-of-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-override-the-state-secrets-privilege\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Does Section 1806(f) of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act override the state secrets privilege? SCOTUS explains\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Does Section 1806(f) of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act override the state secrets privilege?\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/08\/does-section-1806f-of-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-override-the-state-secrets-privilege\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2022-03-08T11:30:59+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2022-03-25T04:56:12+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/08\/does-section-1806f-of-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-override-the-state-secrets-privilege\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/08\/does-section-1806f-of-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-override-the-state-secrets-privilege\/\",\"name\":\"Does Section 1806(f) of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act override the state secrets privilege? SCOTUS explains | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/08\/does-section-1806f-of-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-override-the-state-secrets-privilege\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/08\/does-section-1806f-of-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-override-the-state-secrets-privilege\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2022-03-08T11:30:59+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2022-03-25T04:56:12+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"description\":\"Does Section 1806(f) of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act override the state secrets privilege?\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/08\/does-section-1806f-of-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-override-the-state-secrets-privilege\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/08\/does-section-1806f-of-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-override-the-state-secrets-privilege\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/08\/does-section-1806f-of-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-override-the-state-secrets-privilege\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887,\"caption\":\"Supreme Court of The United States\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/08\/does-section-1806f-of-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-override-the-state-secrets-privilege\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Does Section 1806(f) of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act override the state secrets privilege? SCOTUS explains\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Does Section 1806(f) of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act override the state secrets privilege? SCOTUS explains | SCC Times","description":"Does Section 1806(f) of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act override the state secrets privilege?","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/08\/does-section-1806f-of-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-override-the-state-secrets-privilege\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Does Section 1806(f) of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act override the state secrets privilege? SCOTUS explains","og_description":"Does Section 1806(f) of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act override the state secrets privilege?","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/08\/does-section-1806f-of-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-override-the-state-secrets-privilege\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2022-03-08T11:30:59+00:00","article_modified_time":"2022-03-25T04:56:12+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/08\/does-section-1806f-of-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-override-the-state-secrets-privilege\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/08\/does-section-1806f-of-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-override-the-state-secrets-privilege\/","name":"Does Section 1806(f) of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act override the state secrets privilege? SCOTUS explains | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/08\/does-section-1806f-of-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-override-the-state-secrets-privilege\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/08\/does-section-1806f-of-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-override-the-state-secrets-privilege\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg","datePublished":"2022-03-08T11:30:59+00:00","dateModified":"2022-03-25T04:56:12+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"description":"Does Section 1806(f) of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act override the state secrets privilege?","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/08\/does-section-1806f-of-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-override-the-state-secrets-privilege\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/08\/does-section-1806f-of-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-override-the-state-secrets-privilege\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/08\/does-section-1806f-of-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-override-the-state-secrets-privilege\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg","width":1330,"height":887,"caption":"Supreme Court of The United States"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/08\/does-section-1806f-of-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-override-the-state-secrets-privilege\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Does Section 1806(f) of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act override the state secrets privilege? SCOTUS explains"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/supreme_court_of_US.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":370689,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/12\/24\/attorney-client-privilege-constitutional-state-surveillance-india\/","url_meta":{"origin":263302,"position":0},"title":"Attorney-Client Privilege and the Constitutional State: Liberty’s Last Refuge in the Age of Surveillance","author":"Editor","date":"December 24, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Attorney-client privilege is not a vestige of professional etiquette; it is the living spirit of constitutionalism. by Devadipta Das*","rel":"","context":"In "Op Eds"","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Attorney-Client Privilege Constitutional Law","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Attorney-Client-Privilege-Constitutional-Law.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Attorney-Client-Privilege-Constitutional-Law.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Attorney-Client-Privilege-Constitutional-Law.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Attorney-Client-Privilege-Constitutional-Law.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":368618,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/12\/03\/bom-hc-sets-aside-espionage-cyber-terrorism-charges-against-ex-brahmos-engineer-scc-times\/","url_meta":{"origin":263302,"position":1},"title":"Bombay High Court sets aside espionage & cyber terrorism charges against Ex-BrahMos engineer; reduces life sentence to 3 years imprisonment","author":"Ritu","date":"December 3, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The Court rejected Honey-trap theory and held that the BrahMos engineer is not guilty of espionage, but liable only for negligence under Official Secrets Act","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"cyber-terrorism","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/cyber-terrorism.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/cyber-terrorism.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/cyber-terrorism.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/cyber-terrorism.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":212054,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/14\/rafale-deal-sc-reserves-order-on-admissibility-of-the-leaked-documents\/","url_meta":{"origin":263302,"position":2},"title":"Rafale Deal: SC reserves order on admissibility of the ‘leaked’ documents","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"March 14, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: Making it clear that it will decide first on the preliminary objections raised by the\u00a0Centre\u00a0and then go into the facts of the Rafale fighter jet deal case, the 3-judge bench of Ranjan Gogoi, CJ and Sanjay Kishan Kaul and KM Joseph, JJ reserved it's order on the preliminary\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Hot Off The Press"","block_context":{"text":"Hot Off The Press","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/news\/hot_off_the_press\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":213491,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/04\/10\/breaking-rafale-deal-centres-preliminary-objections-regarding-admissibility-of-the-leaked-documents-dismissed\/","url_meta":{"origin":263302,"position":3},"title":"Rafale deal: Centre’s preliminary objections regarding admissibility of the leaked documents dismissed [Full Report]","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"April 10, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of Ranjan Gogoi, CJ and Sanjay Kishan Kaul and KM Joseph, JJ has dismissed Centre\u2019s preliminary objections regarding admissibility of the leaked documents and has held that the documents are admissible. Joseph, J, wrote a separate but concurring judgment. CJI Gogoi, writing for himself and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":312494,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/30\/former-pm-imran-khan-shah-mehmood-qureshi-cipher-case-official-secrets-pakistan-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":263302,"position":4},"title":"Cipher Case| Special Court sentences Former Pakistan PM Imran Khan and former Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi to 10 years\u2019 prison","author":"Sucheta","date":"January 30, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The \u2018cipher case\u2019 revolves around violation of Official Secrets Act by disclosing a secret diplomatic cable (cipher) sent by Pakistan\u2019s embassy in Washington in March 2022.","rel":"","context":"In "Hot Off The Press"","block_context":{"text":"Hot Off The Press","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/news\/hot_off_the_press\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"cipher case Pakistan Imran Khan Shah Mehmood Qureshi","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/cipher-case-Pakistan-Imran-Khan-Shah-Mehmood-Qureshi.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/cipher-case-Pakistan-Imran-Khan-Shah-Mehmood-Qureshi.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/cipher-case-Pakistan-Imran-Khan-Shah-Mehmood-Qureshi.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/cipher-case-Pakistan-Imran-Khan-Shah-Mehmood-Qureshi.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":316190,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/06\/sc-colorado-decision-name-removal-donald-trump-presidential-primary-ballot-scotus-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":263302,"position":5},"title":"SCOTUS reverses Colorado Supreme Court\u2019s decision to remove Donald Trump\u2019s name from the state\u2019s presidential primary ballot","author":"Sucheta","date":"March 6, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"In a unanimous verdict, the SCOTUS held that power to enforce Section 3 of 14th Amendment to the US Constitution against federal officeholders and candidates, lies with the Congress rather than the States.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Donald Trump Colorado Supreme Court presidential primary ballot SCOTUS","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Donald-Trump-Colorado-Supreme-Court-presidential-primary-ballot-SCOTUS.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Donald-Trump-Colorado-Supreme-Court-presidential-primary-ballot-SCOTUS.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Donald-Trump-Colorado-Supreme-Court-presidential-primary-ballot-SCOTUS.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Donald-Trump-Colorado-Supreme-Court-presidential-primary-ballot-SCOTUS.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/263302","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=263302"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/263302\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/32691"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=263302"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=263302"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=263302"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}