T4 B4 Haddad Legal Fdr- Entire Contents- Court Docs- 1st Pgs Scanned For Reference 180

10 of 28 DOCUMENTS DETROIT FREE PRESS, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. JOHN ASHCROFT, et al., Defendants-Appellants. No. 02-1437 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT 303 F.3d 681; 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 17646; 2002 FED App. 0291P (6th Cir.); 30 Media L. Rep. 2313 August 6, 2002, Argued August 26, 2002, Decided August 26, 2002, Filed

SUBSEQUENT HISTORY: [**1] As Corrected September 20, 2002. Rehearing En Bane Denied January 22, 2003, Reported at: 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 1278. PRIOR HISTORY: Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit. Nos. 02-70339; 02-70340; 02-70605. Nancy G. Edmunds, District Judge. Detroit Free Press v. Ashcroft, 195 F. Supp. 2d 937 (E.D. Mich. 2002). DISPOSITION: Affirmed.

Michigan, Lee Gelernt, AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION, New York, New York, Jonathan Rowe, SOBLE & ROWE, Ann Arbor, Michigan, Leonard M. Niehoff, BUTZEL LONG, Ann Arbor, Michigan, Michael J. Steinberg, Kary L. Moss, AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FUND OF MICHIGAN, Detroit, Michigan, for Appellees. JUDGES: Before: KEITH and DAUGHTREY, Circuit Judges; CARR, District Judge. * * The Honorable James G. Carr, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Ohio, sitting by designation. [**2]

LexisNexis (TM) HEADNOTES - Core Concepts: OPINIONBY: DAMON J. KEITH COUNSEL: ARGUED: Gregory G. Katsas, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, CIVIL DIVISION, Washington, D.C., for Appellants. Herschel P. Fink, HONIGMAN MILLER SCHWARTZ & COHN LLP, Detroit, Michigan, Lee Gelerat, AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION, New York, New York, for Appellees. ON BRIEF: Gregory G. Katsas, Eric D. Miller, Sharon Swingle, Robert M. Loeb, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, CIVIL DIVISION, Washington, D.C., for Appellants. Herschel P. Fink, Brian D. Wassom, HONIGMAN MILLER SCHWARTZ & COHN LLP, Detroit,

OPINION: [***2] [*682] DAMON J. KEITH, Circuit Judge. The primary issue on appeal in this case is whether the First Amendment to the United States Constitution confers a public right of access to deportation hearings. If it does, then the Government must make a showing to overcome that right. No one will ever forget the egregious, deplorable, and despicable terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. These were cowardly acts. In response, our government launched an extensive investigation into the attacks, future threats, conspiracies, and attempts to come. As part of this effort, [***3] immigration laws are prosecuted with increased vigor. The issue before us today involves these efforts.

Page 1 of28

FindLaw for Legal Professionals

E-mail@Ju!

FindLaw | Legal Professionals | Students | Business | Public | News

Stb *•••;

Daily Journal

FindLaw

LEGAL WORKS 200 April 15-16, 2004 - Hyatt Regency San Francisco

Laws - Cases, Codes & Regs

Law Firm FirmSit

Cases & Codes | Forms | Legal Subjects | Federal | State | Library | Boards

Lawyer Search

City or ZIP

Select a State

Select a Practice Area

•

[_

FindLaw: Laws: Cases and Codes: 6TH CIRCUIT COURT Opinions 6th Circuit Court Email a Link to This Case http://laws.fmdlaw.com/6th/02a0291p.html

RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit Rule 206 ELECTRONIC CITATION: 2002 FED App. 0291P (6th Cir.) File Name: 02a0291p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

O C&

FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

Detroit Free Press, et al., No. 02-1437

Plaintiffs-Appellees, v.

John Ashcroft, et al., Defendants-Appellants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit. Nos. 02-70339; 02-70340; 02-70605Nancy G. Edmunds, District Judge.

http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/6th/02a0291p.html

3/19/2004

r

-f

R

O

V

S D

FindLaw WWW.FINDLAW.COM

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION DETROIT FREE PRESS, ET AL, Plaintiffs, v.

Case No. 02-70339 (Consolidated with 02-70340) Honorable Nancy G. Edmunds

JOHNASHCROFT, ETAL, Defendants.

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION [2-1] AND DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM UPON WHICH RELIEF CAN BE GRANTED [10-1]1 In the wake of the horrific events of September 11, 2001, the United States Government launched an extensive, broad-based investigation into the terrorist attacks and other potential threats to United States citizens and interests. As part of that investigation, the Government has identified, questioned, and instituted removal

1The parties have filed numerous pleadings in these matters. For ease, the pleadings relevant to this Order will be referenced as follows: (1) Haddad's motion for preliminary injunctive relief ("Haddad's Motion); (2) Detroit Free Press Plaintiffs' motion for injunctive relief ("Free Press' Motion"); (3) Detroit News Plaintiffs' motion for injunctive and declarative relief ("Detroit News' Motion"); (4) Government's response to the Detroit Free Press Plaintiffs' and Detroit News Plaintiffs' motions and motion to dismiss complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted ("Government's 12(b)(6) Motion as to the Newspaper Plaintiffs"); (5) Detroit News Plaintiffs' response to Government's 12(b)(1) motion and reply to Government's response and 12(b)(6) motion ("Detroit News' Reply"); (6) Detroit Free Press Plaintiffs' reply to Government's response and 12(b)(6) motion and response to Government's 12(b)(1) motion ("Free Press' Reply"); (7) Government's reply brief in support of 12(b)(6) motion in reply to Free Press' and Detroit News' replies ("Government's SurReply").