POTUS Policy Memo
POTUS Policy Memo Project
Fall 2013
Word Count: 649
Title: The US Government violating the US Material Support Statute.
MEMORANDUM
To: Barack Obama, President of the United States
From: Student
Date: November 12, 2013
Subject: The US Government violating the US Material Support Statute.
Since, September 1, 2011, the United States has gone to extreme measures to not only fight terrorism but prevent it too. Under federal law, there are now criminal and civil penalties for anyone giving “material support” to a foreign terrorist organization (FTO). In Holder vs. Humanitarian Law Project, the Supreme Court accepted a very broad definition of what constitutes “material support.” The Court essentially held that one is guilty of providing “material support” if the aid provided to an organization may somehow get into the hands of an FTO. This becomes an issue for the United States government when we give money to the Free Syrian Army (FSA), as we tend to forget these rebels are fighting alongside terrorist organizations. Specifically, we have no way of knowing if the money …show more content…
In section 2339B of AEDPA, the definition of “material support” is mentioned and/or created (Sutherland 237). When Congress passed the USA Patriot Act of 2001 and the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevent Act of 2004, both acts successfully broadened the definition of “material support” (Sutherland 237-238). Under the Material Support law, one risks going to prison for 15 years if he provides any of the following to an FTO: providing personnel service, advice, training, intangible or tangible property and communication (Price, Rubenstein and Price 3). This law does not differentiate between people who intend to support a groups’ illegal activity and those who do not
Fall 2013
Word Count: 649
Title: The US Government violating the US Material Support Statute.
MEMORANDUM
To: Barack Obama, President of the United States
From: Student
Date: November 12, 2013
Subject: The US Government violating the US Material Support Statute.
Since, September 1, 2011, the United States has gone to extreme measures to not only fight terrorism but prevent it too. Under federal law, there are now criminal and civil penalties for anyone giving “material support” to a foreign terrorist organization (FTO). In Holder vs. Humanitarian Law Project, the Supreme Court accepted a very broad definition of what constitutes “material support.” The Court essentially held that one is guilty of providing “material support” if the aid provided to an organization may somehow get into the hands of an FTO. This becomes an issue for the United States government when we give money to the Free Syrian Army (FSA), as we tend to forget these rebels are fighting alongside terrorist organizations. Specifically, we have no way of knowing if the money …show more content…
In section 2339B of AEDPA, the definition of “material support” is mentioned and/or created (Sutherland 237). When Congress passed the USA Patriot Act of 2001 and the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevent Act of 2004, both acts successfully broadened the definition of “material support” (Sutherland 237-238). Under the Material Support law, one risks going to prison for 15 years if he provides any of the following to an FTO: providing personnel service, advice, training, intangible or tangible property and communication (Price, Rubenstein and Price 3). This law does not differentiate between people who intend to support a groups’ illegal activity and those who do not