Permissible Activities

Webinar - Are My Peacebuilding Activities Permissible?

Event Date: 
October 17, 2017
The 2010 Supreme Court ruling in Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project had a chilling effect on peacebuilders working abroad and left practitioners worrying that their work might run afoul of US counterterrorism law. Seven years later, many of those same questions persist, and the current administration presents additional uncertainties. No new guidance has been issued since the landmark Supreme Court decision, but there are guideposts.
 
Hear from two dynamic speakers who will outline the legal landscape and detail the current state of practice for those in the field. Participate in a Q&A geared to what matters to you now. 
 
Tuesday, October 17
 
 
Speakers:
* George Foote, a lawyer with Dorsey, serves as outside general counsel to the U.S. Institute of Peace and to PeaceTech Lab, Inc. He will share his insight on how to navigate these uncertain waters. 
 
* Kimberly Brody Hart, senior manager of global affairs and partnerships at Search for Common Ground, will discuss the practical implications from the perspective of a peacebuilder. 
 
See more in our Know Your Rights series. 
 

View the recording

Save the Date: Webinar - Are My Peacebuilding Activities Permissible?

The 2010 Supreme Court ruling in Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project had a chilling effect on peacebuilders working abroad and left practitioners worrying that their work might run afoul of US counterterrorism law. Seven years later, many of those same questions persist, but there are guideposts. 
 
Mark your calendars for an informative webinar:
 
Tuesday, October 17
 
 
George Foote, a lawyer with Dorsey, serves as outside general counsel to the U.S. Institute of Peace and to PeaceTech Lab, Inc. He will share his insight on how to navigate these uncertain waters. 
 
Kimberly Brody Hart, senior manager of global affairs and partnerships at Search for Common Ground, will discuss the practical implications from the perspective of a peacebuilder. 
 

View the recording

Permissible Activities for Peacebuilders: New Resource

A new resource on our website outlines permissible activities for peacebuilders. 

The fact sheet is based on statements by U.S. officials in the Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project case. Since that Supreme Court decision, peacebuilders have faced significant uncertainty as to what communications with Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs) remain permissible under the prohibition on material support of terrorism in 18 USC 2339B. The lack of clarity about how it should be interpreted and applied has created a chilling impact on peacebuilding activities, inhibited constitutionally permitted speech and association, and reduced the kinds of contacts that might help prevent/counter violent extremism and terrorism.

This fact sheet is intended to provide a measure of clarity by drawing on representations made by the government to the Supreme Court during oral argument and in its brief in the litigation regarding what it considers to be permissible communications with listed groups.    

View the new resource

Analysis: Permissible Activities for Peacebuilders - Based on Statements by U.S. Officials

Date: 
April 14, 2017

Since the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project (HLP), peacebuilding organizations have faced significant uncertainty as to what communications with Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs) remain permissible under the prohibition on material support of terrorism in 18 USC 2339B.  Although there have been no prosecutions for peacebuilding activities since the decision, the lack of clarity about how it should be interpreted and applied has created a chilling impact on peacebuilding activities, inhibited constitutionally permitted speech and association, and reduced the kinds of contacts that might help prevent/counter violent extremism and terrorism. This fact sheet is intended to provide a measure of clarity by drawing on representations made by the government to the Supreme Court during oral argument and in its brief in the Holder litigation about what it considers to be permissible communications with listed groups.[1] A chart summarizing these statements is included. A PDF of this analysis is available here.

Subscribe to Permissible Activities