Google Inc. et al v. Egger et al

Filing 333

Download PDF
Google Inc. et al v. Egger et al Doc. 333 Att. 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK _______________________________________ | CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, | TINA M. FOSTER, GITANJALI S. GUTIERREZ, | SEEMA AHMAD, MARIA LAHOOD, | RACHEL MEEROPOL, | | Plaintiffs, | | v. | | GEORGE W. BUSH, | President of the United States; | NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, | LTG Keith B. Alexander, Director; | DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, | LTG Michael D. Maples, Director; | CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, | Michael V. Hayden, Director; | DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, | Michael Chertoff, Secretary; | FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, | Robert S. Mueller III, Director; | JOHN D. NEGROPONTE, | Director of National Intelligence, | | Defendants. | _______________________________________| Case No. 06-cv-313 Judge Gerard E. Lynch Magistrate Judge Kevin N. Fox AFFIRMATION OF MARIA LAHOOD I, Maria LaHood, an attorney admitted to practice before this Court, and the Courts of the State of New York, hereby affirm under penalty of perjury as follows: 1. I represent Maher Arar, a Canadian citizen, in Arar v. Ashcroft, 04-CV-0249 (DGT) (E.D.N.Y.), against U.S. officials responsible for sending him to Syria where he was tortured and arbitrarily detained. In 1992, Mr. Arar was determined to be a member of Al Qaeda by the then-United States Immigration and Naturalization Service. The U.S. Government has not backed down from that position. Mr. Arar is currently prohibited from entering the United States. 2. As Mr. Arar's attorney, I need to communicate with him about everything from mundane matters to key facts and tactical strategies and decisions in his case. I regularly consult him regarding our litigation strategy, and am ethically obligated to promptly apprise him of any significant developments. Telephone and email are obviously the easiest and most efficient means of communicating with Mr. Arar. 3. Since I became aware of the NSA surveillance program, I have become extremely cautious regarding what I should say to Mr. Arar over the phone or by email. I am constantly monitoring myself during conversations with him, and weighing what must be urgently communicated electronically that cannot wait until we are able to meet. 4. Although I cannot be sure that our communications are not intercepted under FISA, I am much more concerned knowing that surveillance under the NSA program is not subject to any judicially enforced restrictions or judicial review. 5. There are a number of issues which I feel I cannot safely discuss with Mr. Arar over the phone. Instead, these conversations have been deferred until we can meet in person or another safe means of communication can be found. Although I have been planning to fly to Canada to meet with him in person to discuss these matters, this has been impossible to date due to my work schedule. The travel and accommodation expenses of any visit to Canada will be borne by the Center. 6. There are important matters which I urgently need to discuss with Mr. Arar but have been unable to in the wake of the Program. These include everything from questions about facts relating to his claims to tactical discussions about litigation strategy which either require his input before a decision can be made, or which have been made by us as his attorneys but should

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?