United States v. Lindh

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that “personnel” is not vague as applied to the “hard core” conduct of participating in military activity on behalf of a FTO
• stating that “[f]ol-lowing his capture, Lindh was interrogated, transported to the United States, and ultimately charged in this district”
• explaining that such deference was “warranted given the President’s special competency in, and constitutional 65 responsibility for, foreign affairs and the conduct of overseas military operations”
• training with and fighting alongside terrorist groups in Afghanistan potentially equaled providing self as “personnel”
• identifying material support in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2339B as the predicate “crime of violence” required for the firearms charge under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(e
• stating that constitutional principles “govern resolution of this motion”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).