JURIST Supported by the University of Pittsburgh
Serious law. Primary sources. Global perspective.

Sunday, March 07, 2010

Federal judge allows Rumsfeld torture suit to proceed
Zach Zagger at 11:12 AM ET

[JURIST] A judge for the US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois [official website] on Friday denied [decision, PDF] a motion to dismiss a torture suit brought against former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld [JURIST news archive] by two American citizens captured while working in Iraq. Judge Wayne Andersen dismissed two other counts but allowed the count alleging the plaintiffs were subject to cruel and degrading treatment methods during their detention. The plaintiffs, Donald Vance and Nathan Ertel, were working for a private Iraqi security firm called Shield Group Security. There they witnessed suspicious activity that they reported to US authorities, but they were later arrested by US forces and detained without representation. The plaintiffs brought a cause of action recognized in Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics [opinion text] against Rumsfeld, claiming that he was personally responsible for the alleged unconstitutional treatment they faced while in detention. While allowing the suit seems in conflict with the recent decision in Ashcroft v. Iqbal [JURIST report], which extended heightened pleading requirements under Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a) [text] beyond antitrust cases, the judge wrote that Iqbal "requires vigilance on our part to ensure that claims which do not state a plausible claim for relief are not allowed to occupy the time of high-ranking government officials," but is not supposed to be a "categorical bar on claims against" them.

Rumsfeld has faced multiple suits brought in relation to treatment of detainees. Last month, a judge for the US District Court for the District of Columbia [official website] ruled [JURIST report] that claims of unlawful treatment and wrongful death brought on behalf of two former Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive] detainees are barred by the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA) [text, PDF]. The claim was brought [JURIST report] against Rumsfeld and more than 100 military officers and personnel under the Alien Tort Claims Act [text], which provides that district courts have original jurisdiction to hear claims for torts "committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States." In another suit last December, the US Supreme Court [official website] declined to hear [JURIST report] a lawsuit against Rumsfeld and other military officials brought by four UK citizens who were detained at Guantanamo.

Link |  | print | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | Facebook page

For more legal news check the Paper Chase Archive...


 UK to introduce laws to eradicate female genital mutilation
9:43 AM ET, July 23

 Recruitment of child soldiers persists in DRC: UN report
8:37 AM ET, July 23

 Kuwait top court upholds 10-year sentence for Twitter user
7:09 AM ET, July 23

 click for more...

Get JURIST legal news delivered daily to your e-mail!


Unprecedented Notice of Warrantless Wiretapping in a Closed Case
Ramzi Kassem
CUNY School of Law


Paper Chase is JURIST's real-time legal news service, powered by a team of 30 law student reporters and editors led by law professor Bernard Hibbitts at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. As an educational service, Paper Chase is dedicated to presenting important legal news and materials rapidly, objectively and intelligibly in an accessible, ad-free format.


Paper Chase welcomes comments, tips and URLs from readers. E-mail us at JURIST@jurist.org