Court rules Ashcroft can be held liable in 9/11 case

The court found that a man who was detained as a witness in a federal terrorism case can sue Ashcroft over alleged violations of his constitutional rights. Abdullah al-Kidd, a US citizen and former University of Idaho student, filed the lawsuit against Ashcroft and other officials in 2005, contending that his civil rights were violated when he was detained as a material witness for two weeks in 2003.

Kidd said the investigation and detention not only caused him to lose a scholarship to study in Saudi Arabia, but cost him employment opportunities and caused his marriage to fall apart.

He contended that his detention exemplified an illegal government policy created by Ashcroft to arrest and detain people - particularly Muslim men and those of Arab decent - as material witnesses if the government suspected them of a crime but had no evidence to charge them.

Ashcroft had asked the judge to dismiss the matter, saying that because his position at the Department of Justice was prosecutorial he was entitled to absolute immunity from the lawsuit.

Kidd’s lawyer, Lee Gelernt of the American Civil Liberties Union, said the ruling by the panel had implications reaching beyond the government’s actions in detaining material witnesses after the attacks.

“The use of the material witness statute as a post-9/11 detention tool is one of the least understood parts of the post-9/11 landscape, but it has enormous implications because it was done in secret and the government has never renounced the policy,’’ Gelernt said. “Our hope is that we can now begin the process of uncovering the full contours of this illegal national policy.’’

The Ninth Circuit judges said Kidd’s allegations plausibly suggest that Ashcroft purposely used the material witness statute to detain suspects whom he wished to investigate and detain preventively.