UC Law Constitutional Quarterly
Abstract
The federal law prohibiting the provision of material support to terrorist organizations has been no stranger to controversy. From its politically charged origins through its repeated amendment after September 11, 2001, it has remained an important, but often critiqued, weapon in the government's legal response to terrorism. The most prominent legal challenge to the law lasted over a decade. It culminated in June 2010, when the United States Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the law in Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project. The Court's opinion, however, correctly recognized that important questions remain unresolved.
One such question, which this Note addresses, is the application of the law to Muslim charities. Muslim charities are a complex, often misunderstood phenomenon. The use of the law against groups such as the Holy Land Foundation has achieved limited success, but has also alienated significant numbers of Muslim Americans. Civil actions against the group based on the material support law have been particularly ineffective. Likewise, criminal prosecutions have met considerable difficulty. This Note explores applications of the material support statute to Muslim charities and concludes by proposing several recommendations for reform in this important area.
Recommended Citation
Michael G. Freedman,
Prosecuting Terrorism: The Material Support Statute and Muslim Charities,
38 Hastings Const. L.Q. 1113
(2011).
Available at: https://repository.uclawsf.edu/hastings_constitutional_law_quaterly/vol38/iss4/12