The Center for Constitutional Rights is a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization. On request, a copy of CCR’s latest financial report may be obtained from us or from the Office of the Attorney General of
the State of New York, Charities Bureau, 120 Broadway, New York, NY 10271.
The Center for Constitutional Rights is dedicated to advancing and protecting the
rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights. Founded in 1966 by attorneys who represented civil rights move-
ments in the South, CCR is a non-profit legal and educational organization commit-
ted to the creative use of law as a positive force for social change.
Design: Nicholas Coster, [email protected]. Photo credits: p 2: Yanick Salazar • p 4: Pam Bradshaw • p 6: Pam Bradshaw • p 7: Juan Manuel, Herrera/OAS • p 11: Qa’id Jacobs • p
12: Qa’id Jacobs • p 14: Alexis Agathocleous • p.15: Snowden: Laura Poitras/Praxis Films. Assange: Cancillería del Ecuador. Manning: courtesy of www.bradleymanning.org • p16: © RON-
ALD KABUUBI/epa/Corbis • p.19: Courtesy of Iraq Veterans Against the War/Civil Soldier Alliance • p.20-21: Picture 2: Laura Raymond. Picture 5: Organization of Women’s Freedom
in Iraq. Pictures 6, 11, 15: Pam Bradshaw. Picture 10: Courtesy of Iraq Veterans Against the War/Civil Soldier Alliance. Picture 12: Aliya Hana Hussain • p 22-23: Pictures 2, 6: Pam Brad-
shaw. Pictures 4, 5: Sameer A. Khan • p 23: Pictures 4, 5 by Sameer Khan • p 27: Pam Bradshaw • p 29: David Hicks: Adam Thomas (devdsp@flickr) • p 30: Top left: Shayana Kadidal •
p.32: Chelsea Manning by Alicia Neal, in cooperation with Chelsea herself, commissioned by the Chelsea Manning Support Network • p 33: Top: Pam Bradshaw. Bottom: Kevin Gay • p 34: Bot-
tom left: Alexis Agathocleous • p 36: Bram Cymet (bcymet@flickr) • p 41: Bottom: Courtesy of Iraq Veterans Against the War/Civil Soldier Alliance • p 46: Douglas Gorenstein • p 62: Ruby Dee:
Courtesy of MDCarchives
01
Table of Contents
Message from the Executive Director .................................................................. 2
Guantánamo ................................................................................................... 4
Government Misconduct and Racial Justice .........................................................10
International Human Rights ..............................................................................16
Movement Support .........................................................................................20
Bertha Justice Institute .....................................................................................22
Communications ............................................................................................24
Message from the Legal Director .......................................................................26
Case Index ....................................................................................................27
CCR Joint Projects ..........................................................................................39
Partners in Litigation ........................................................................................42
CCR Donors...................................................................................................46
Financials ......................................................................................................59
CCR Board and Staff .......................................................................................60
In Memoriam .................................................................................................62
02
Message from the Executive Director
“Without struggle, there can be no progress,” Frederick Douglass famously observed. At CCR,
years and sometimes decades of hard work yielded significant—at times groundbreaking—
progress over the past 12 months. We have been in the trenches fighting police discrimination,
government surveillance, persecution of vulnerable communities, and torture, and you have
been there with us; your support has given us the resources we need to remain in these fights
and see them through to victories.
Our landmark victory in the Floyd v. City of New York stop-and-frisk case was a stunning rebuke
to the NYPD and set in motion what will be an historic process of community involvement in
designing sweeping reforms; a process in which CCR will be deeply engaged. It came after 14
years of litigation. The phones had not stopped ringing in response to our Floyd win when two
days later a federal judge issued a first-of-its-kind ruling in our case against Scott Lively for his
role in persecution of LGBTI people in Uganda. Allowing the case to proceed, the judge affirmed
that LGBTI people are covered under international law, making their persecution a crime against
humanity.
Meanwhile, CCR’s dogged pursuit of Vatican accountability continues this year resulting in not
one, but two UN Committees summoning the Vatican to Geneva to answer questions about its
role in exposing children to sexual violence and protecting abusers. When we first filed our case
against the Vatican in the International Criminal Court in 2011, many people scratched their
heads, wondering why we thought we could possibly hold the Vatican responsible for its actions.
However, we and our clients at SNAP knew that the evidence would speak for itself, and this
year, both the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child and the UN Committee Against Torture
issued scathing reports on the Vatican’s failure under its international treaty obligations.
Some CCR cases came to a close this past year, after many years of determined work. Most
notably, we reached a final settlement in our Vulcans case, ending decades of racially discrimina-
tory hiring policies at the FDNY and creating the most diverse class of incoming firefighters in
history. After the dismissal of our case challenging the government’s drone program, our client
Nasser al-Aulaqi decided he could not bear the pain of reliving the loss of his son and grandson
again and declined to appeal the decision. Yet even though we faced setbacks our four-year
effort to demand answers in the Obama administration’s targeted killings program produced
notable results, including a Justice Department white paper, leaked in 2013, attempting to justify
the killing of American citizens without due process, a broader public record and more robust
public discourse on the program.
03
One of the hallmarks of CCR’s work is that we remain undaunted. Our case challenging the
NYPD’s surveillance of Muslim communities in New Jersey was dismissed in early 2014, but we
are appealing that decision and have lined up an impressive array of legal groups in support of
our case, as well as the children of Fred Korematsu, Gordon Hirabayashi and Minoru Yasui, who
were held in Japanese internment camps based upon their national origin. Meanwhile, that same
perseverance has paid off in our case against CACI, which had also been dismissed. But the
Fourth Circuit Appeals Court ruled that victims of torture at Abu Ghraib can pursue legal claims
against private military contractors.
As I look back on the year, I see tremendous progress towards justice; whether it’s our victories
in Floyd and Vulcans, or against-the-odds movement towards accountability like our Vatican
work and our work on behalf of torture victims at Abu Ghraib, these victories are as much yours
as they are ours and our clients; we couldn’t do them without you. It’s the generous and unflag-
ging support of our donors that makes it possible for CCR to demand justice day after day, week
after week, month after month, and year after year.
Looking forward, the same is true as well. Recently, the New York Times called our Pelican Bay
case one “that could shape national policy on the use of long-term solitary confinement.” Our
work on behalf of the detainees at Guantánamo and our fierce determination to see this shame-
ful prison finally closed will likewise continue for as long as it takes. Our latest cases, challenging
the use of the No Fly List to coerce Muslims to spy on their communities and demanding answers
about the government’s immigration detention policies, will move ahead with the same unrelent-
ing commitment to demand and create progress.
Through it all, it will once again be you, CCR’s supporters, who are the foundation of everything
we do; it is your dedication to justice and support of CCR that allow us to work to make justice a
reality. Without you, none of this would be possible. With you, progress and justice are possible.
Thank you!
Message from the Executive Director
Vincent Warren
04
Guantánamo
Twelve years after bringing the original challenges to unlawful detentions in Guantánamo, CCR continues to fight for justice there on several
fronts: through litigation in U.S. courts and international tribunals; through diplomatic and advocacy efforts to resettle our clients in third coun-
tries; through public education and outreach on the issues; and through aggressive communications and media work aimed at keeping the issues
in the public eye. We are continually telling our clients’ stories to ensure that the men at Guantánamo are not forgotten.
As one of his first official acts in office, President Obama promised to
return America to “the moral high ground” in the so-called “War on
Terror,” by signing an executive order to close the prison at Guantá-
namo Bay within a year. Despite repeatedly reaffirming that promise,
the president has failed the 149 men who continue to languish in
Guantánamo, more than 12 years later.
Following the longest period without a single detainee transfer and
a period of particularly deep despair at the prison, President Obama
bowed to the pressure created by the mass detainee hunger strike
and released 17 men; 79 men are currently cleared for release. This
proved that, despite efforts to blame Congress for inertia at Guantá-
namo, the president has ample authority to release men—when he
has the will. While this was a positive development, the pace of releas-
es remains far too slow, especially because the majority of men have
never been and will never be charged with a crime. And despite lifting
the blanket ban on transfers to Yemen, the president has nothing to
show for it: not a single Yemeni man has left Guantánamo alive since
2010. Yemenis now constitute nearly two-thirds of the population at
Guantánamo, although most were cleared for release years ago. Some
who have been transferred are sent against their will to countries
where they face grave threats. This includes CCR client Djamel Ame-
ziane who was involuntarily sent to Algeria even though we identified
for the administration a number of safe countries willing to accept him.
As one of the few human rights organizations that represent detained
men, our deep, longstanding relationships with our clients remain
vital to our work. By regularly travelling to meet with our clients in
Guantánamo, we hear directly from them about the conditions at the
prison and their physical and emotional health, which informs our
legal and advocacy strategies and enables us to amplify their voices.
GUANTÁNAMO GLOBAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE
“I have imagined myself in my mother’s embrace, she is crying. I am crying. Can I ever
finish greeting her? Who would I go to first? My mother has the most right, but wouldn’t
my daughter feel the same? Maybe when I hug my mother, Hafsa will slip in between us.”
– Fahd Ghazy
CCR staff in NYC’s Times Square on the Global Day of Action to Close
Guantánamo and End Indefinite Detention.
05
LITIGATION
The Center’s clients’ stories vary, but
most tell of the torment that comes
with being indefinitely detained for
more than a dozen years without
charge or trial. At home, children
have grown up, parents have died,
and the futures they once dreamed
about have slipped away. Yet many
of these men remain hopeful, with
dreams of a new future once they
are released. Fahd Ghazy (see p.9)
was only 17 years old when he was
rendered to Guantánamo; he is one of
the last remaining prisoners to have
been detained as a juvenile. Tariq Ba
Odah has been in Guantánamo since
2002, and has been on a seven-year
hunger strike to protest his indefinite
detention. Twice a day he is strapped
to a restraint chair and painfully force-
fed. Mohammed al-Hamiri suffered
severe brain injuries as a young man
and traveled to Pakistan in search of
affordable medical care where he was
apprehended and sold to the U.S. for
a bounty. CCR continues to advocate for the release of Ghaleb Al-
Bihani, who was the fourth detainee to be reviewed by the Obama
administration’s new Periodic Review Board, established in 2011.
The Board approved Al-Bihani for transfer in May. Thus, while all
four men have been cleared for release from Guantánamo, they
remain imprisoned there.
CCR continues to chal-
lenge the legitimacy of the
military commissions that the
Obama administration has
sought to continue in lieu
of fair criminal trials. To this
end, CCR is demanding that
the U.S. government admit
wrongdoing and accept
responsibility for the torture
of our client Majid Khan.
Khan took a plea bargain
in his military commission
to hasten the day he could
meet his daughter, who was
born after his capture. In addition, the Center has recently filed a
direct challenge to the validity of the military commissions system
itself, which aims to vacate the guilty plea of our client David Hicks,
because the charge to which he pled guilty to obtain his freedom
is not actually a crime under international law. If successful, these
cases will demonstrate what CCR has been arguing from the begin-
ning—that military commissions are not legitimate courts and their
verdicts will never carry real weight or validity.
The Center continues to advocate for fair trials for those whom the
government has targeted for prosecution and will continue to co-
ordinate and support the efforts of non-CCR habeas counsel. CCR
is currently litigating a case seeking public disclosure of videotapes
of Mohammed al Qahtani, a Saudi citizen who has been detained
in Guantánamo for 12 years and who was the victim of the Penta-
gon’s “First Special Interrogation Plan”—a regime of “aggressive
interrogation techniques” amounting to torture. The government
has destroyed hundreds of hours of videotapes depicting harsh
interrogations for the express purpose of avoiding public scrutiny.
Making the remaining tapes public will expose how the U.S. has
treated the detained men, increase the likelihood of holding of-
ficials accountable, and help ensure such forms of detainee torture
never happen again.
Courts
“All I think about is the day my freedom will
be given back to me, for it will be the day of
my re-birth. I want to become a father and
hold my baby in my arms, and provide for
my family and to my child.”
– Ghaleb Al-Bihani
Military Commissions
Our Clients
Top: CCR client Fahd Ghazy.
Bottom: CCR client Ghaleb
Al-Bihani.
CCR’s legal team travels to Guantánamo
regularly to provide our clients with up-
dates on any developments in their legal
cases and advocacy efforts made on their
behalf.
06
ADVOCACY
On January 11, 2013, as we marked the 11
th
anniversary of Guan-
tánamo, it appeared as though transfers might never resume and
Guantánamo had become a distant memory for many outside the
prison’s walls. This all changed in February 2013, when most of the
166 men then held at the prison engaged in a collective, nonviolent
hunger strike to protest more than a decade of indefinite detention
without charge, deteriorating prison conditions, and intentional
offenses against their religion. The physical and psychological toll
on our clients and other hunger strikers was immeasurable, but their
self-sacrifice succeeded in garnering increased world attention and a
refocusing on the injustice—and human cost—of Guantánamo. CCR
and allies worked tirelessly to keep the spotlight on the men’s efforts
and to use the government’s fear of another prison death to apply
political pressure on officials to resume transfers. All major news
outlets extensively covered the prisoners’ harrowing accounts of
the human rights abuses, and federal judges decried the prisoners’
treatment and harshly rebuked the government for interfering with
counsel access to the prisoners. Major international human rights
bodies condemned the White House’s failure to close the prison, its
inadequate response to the hunger strike, and the inhumane prac-
tice of force-feeding.
CCR built on the momentum created by the hunger strikers by
developing dynamic advocacy strategies with our clients at the fore-
front. In May 2014, one year after President Obama again pledged
to close Guantánamo and lifted his ban on transfers to Yemen, CCR
joined activists and human rights organizations in dozens of cities
worldwide for the Global Day of Action to Close Guantánamo and
End Indefinite Detention. The Center also created a short video in
response to the president’s lack of action, which highlighted our Ye-
meni clients who, despite being cleared for release, remain detained
because of where they are from.
Our advocacy efforts have demonstrated the power of our clients’
stories to move audiences to act. And in turn, we are able to share
with our clients that their voices were heard and that people around
the globe are standing in solidarity with them. As our client Fahd
Ghazy has said, “You are the voice of the voiceless.”
Guantánamo
“Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution provides that ‘[t]he President shall be the
Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States ... ‘ It would seem to
follow, therefore, that the President of the United States, as Commander-in-Chief, has
the authority—and power—to directly address the issue of force-feeding of the detainees
at Guantánamo Bay.” – Judge Gladys Kessler
Activism
A CCR supporter reads a brochure featuring our Yemeni clients who, despite
being cleared for release, have spent a third of their lives detained at Guantá-
namo without charge.
07
CCR continues its work before the Inter-American
Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), an interna-
tional platform for our advocacy on behalf of the men at
Guantánamo that provides an opportunity to highlight
the U.S. government’s failure to adhere to international
human rights norms. CCR and co-petitioners, the Center
for Justice and International Law, Physicians for Human
Rights, and Reprieve, filed a request for a thematic hear-
ing, which took place in March 2013. We submitted over
600 pages of documentation to inform the Commission
of the grave psychological impact of indefinite detention,
the deaths of men at Guantánamo, the lack of access to
fair trials, and illegitimate U.S. policies that restrict the
closure of the prison. The hearing took place during the
mass hunger strike in 2013. This hearing marked the first
time since President Obama’s re-election that U.S. of-
ficials were confronted with questions about Guantánamo
in a formal public setting. As a result, in July 2013, the
IACHR extended the scope of its existing Precautionary
Measures due to “allegations of widespread abuse and
mistreatment, including unnecessary and humiliating
searches, the force feeding of detainees who have chosen
to participate in a hunger strike, and the increasing segre-
gation and isolation of detainees.”
In August 2013, President Obama transferred
two men out of Guantánamo, the first trans-
fers in nearly a year. While CCR welcomed
the resumption of voluntary transfers, the
repatriation four months later of CCR client,
Djamel Ameziane, to Algeria against his will
and despite his fear of persecution in his
home country, was deeply disturbing. CCR
had worked for years on Ameziane’s behalf to
secure alternative locations for resettlement.
His forced transfer to Algeria violates inter-
national law, including the United Nations
Convention Against Torture. CCR demanded
that the Algerian government immediately
release Ameziane from secret detention,
treat him humanely, and respect his human
rights. We continue to monitor his condition,
demand transparency and accountability from the Algerian government, and
ensure that Ameziane does not suffer persecution.
CCR also continues to advocate on behalf of several of our other released
clients as well, including Muhammed and Abdul Nasser Khan Tumani, a father
and son from Syria who were resettled in Portugal and Cape Verde in 2009 and
2010 and have yet to be reunited.
International Advocacy Resettlement Efforts
CCR Senior Staff Attorney Wells Dixon advocates on behalf of
Guantánamo detainees before the Inter-American Commission
on Human Rights.
CCR client Djamel Ameziane.
“We keep walking through the tunnel in search of
a shred of light hoping it would appear at the end
of that tunnel... And for every couple of steps we
make, this strong air pushes us one step backward,
as if it is stealing one step from us. Yet we keep
walking forward.” – Mohammed Al-Hamiri
08
Guantánamo
GUANTÁNAMO BY THE NUMBERS
779 37
86%
*
22
630 9
149 8
8
88
0
79
58
men and boys, all of them Muslim,
have been imprisoned over time at
Guantánamo since January 2002.
men have been designated for indefi-
nite detention without charge or trial
by President Obama’s Task Force.
or more were children when taken
to the detention camp.
More men have died (9) at Guantánamo...
...than have been convicted (8) by
the military commissions.
years is the longest hunger strike
by a man at Guantánamo. It’s still
going.
senior government officials have
been held accountable for the
wrongful detention and torture at
Guantánamo.
were sold to the United States dur-
ing a time when the U.S. military was
offering large bounties for capture;
commonly, $5,000 offered per man.
men have been transferred.
men remain detained.
of them are from Yemen.
have been cleared for release but
remain imprisoned.
of those who are cleared for release
are Yemenis, but they continue to be
detained because of their citizenship.
*Seton Hall University School of Law,
Report on Guantánamo Detainees, 2006.
09
Ten years ago, CCR and the few brave others
who dared to challenge the Bush administration’s
lawless Guantánamo prison achieved a landmark
victory in the Supreme Court. The Court’s deci-
sion in Rasul v. Bush, which was hailed at the time
by some legal scholars as “the most important
civil liberties case in half a century,” represented a
major blow to the Bush administration’s assertion
of unchecked executive power and promised the
possibility of legal relief for hundreds of detainees.
Yet, CCR’s commemoration of the Rasul anniver-
sary was bittersweet. After more than a decade,
149 men—including CCR clients—remain impris-
oned, the courts have failed to live up to Rasul’s
promise of meaningful judicial review, and Obama
has faltered on carrying out his promise to shutter
the prison.
Despite its diminishing promise of enforceable
legal rights, Rasul was a transformative accom-
plishment because it opened the prison up to
the world—first through hundreds of lawyers,
followed by press. These lawyers, mobilized by
CCR from all practice areas and all regions of the
country, flooded the prison, pressured home gov-
ernments to repatriate their citizens, exposed the
blackness of torture and arbitrary detention, gave
names and stories to the men being held and, as
a result, secured the release of more than 600
men. Their tireless efforts also led to the improve-
ment of conditions and treatment at the base.
CCR’s victory in Rasul and our role in coordinating
hundreds of legal challenges to military practices
in Guantánamo represented, in the words of one
CCR supporter, “the greatest mass defense effort
in American history.” As we look back on the past
10 years challenging indefinite detention and tor-
ture in Guantánamo, we recognize that our hard
work is not over, but that the legacy of Rasul is well
worth celebrating.
Last year, the mass hunger strike
by detainees accomplished
the near impossible: the men
returned the public spotlight
back onto Guantánamo, forc-
ing President Obama to publicly
re-commit to closing the prison
and lift his self-imposed ban on
detainee transfers to Yemen.
The heightened sense of urgency
and the outpouring of harrow-
ing stories throughout the strike
led CCR to be bolder, and client
focused, in our advocacy efforts. Storytelling became a useful way to humanize
the men detained and educate the administration and public. A story, a man’s
story, can, if done well, have a life of its own—it can be shared, amplified, and
it resonates with our own humanity. Using client photographs and artwork,
quotes from letters and meetings, and film, we narrated the injustice of Guantá-
namo, and shared them on popular social media platforms.
In an adventurous new project, in collaboration with fellow Bertha Founda-
tion grantee the New Media Advocacy Project (N-Map), CCR created a short
film about our client Fahd Ghazy and the effect that Guantánamo has had on
his family and community. Only 17 when he arrived at Guantánamo, Fahd, like
more than half of the men there, has been cleared for release for years, but he
is trapped almost entirely because of his Yemeni citizenship. Key to moving the
administration to resume transfers—especially to Yemen where no one has
been transferred since 2010—is showing that Fahd and others like him can be
successfully repatriated or resettled because they have networks ready to sup-
port them, and the resourcefulness and skills to allow them to begin rebuilding
their lives peacefully upon release.
CCR travelled to Yemen in December to meet with and film the Ghazy family
over the course of two weeks. While the film shows the life of just one family,
the story it tells of separation, love, and hope is universal. The final product is a
beautiful portrait of the life that awaits Fahd’s return. The documentary is being
used as a tool to advocate for Fahd’s release with administration officials, invigo-
rate our supporters to take action, and attract new and diverse constituencies
and showcase CCR’s work as we use it across innovative platforms and forums.
Telling Stories of Hope for Life beyond Guantánamo
BEYOND GUANTÁNAMO 10 YEARS LATER
CCR’s Omar Farah with Abduraheem Ghazy, the
youngest brother of our client Fahd Ghazy, out-
side his home in Yemen.
Rasul Anniversary
10
Government Misconduct and Racial Justice
RACIAL DISCRIMINATION
In August 2013, Judge Scheindlin ruled in favor of CCR’s plaintiffs in
our groundbreaking class action racial profiling case, Floyd v. City of
New York. The judge held that the New York City Police Department
(NYPD) had engaged in a policy and widespread practice of unconsti-
tutional and racially discriminatory stops and frisks. Accepting CCR’s
demand that comprehensive and systemic reform was required, she
also laid out a series of reforms necessary to bring NYPD stop-and-frisk
practices into sustained compliance with the U.S. Constitution, includ-
ing the appointment of an independent monitor to oversee the changes
to training, supervision and police practices. She also accepted CCR’s
proposal and ordered a groundbreaking “joint remedial process,” which
will bring together affected communities, elected officials, the police,
and CCR clients and attorneys in the case, and will ensure that commu-
nities most affected by these policies will have a seat at the table to help
shape the future of policing in New York—and potentially the nation.
Predictably, then-Mayor Bloomberg and the City of New York attempt-
ed to block the court order. In October, CCR and co-counsel argued
before an appeals court and only two days later, the court issued an
unprecedented decision that stayed the ruling, but went far beyond
what either party asked for by shockingly removing Judge Scheindlin
from the case, accusing her of misconduct in accepting Floyd as a “re-
lated case” to CCR’s predecessor stop-and-frisk lawsuit Daniels v. City
of New York and violating judicial ethics by making public comments
in the press. Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the School of Law at the
University of California, Irvine, rightfully called the ruling both “unprec-
edented” and “dangerous.”
From October to January, the case was caught up in a spate of virtu-
ally unprecedented appeals motions, orders and responses, which
consumed the entirety of the CCR legal team, our co-counsel, and our
Communications and Education and Outreach departments in order to
respond. After negotiating in private with the new administration, CCR
was thrilled to announce, on January 30, alongside Mayor de Blasio,
that the parties had reached an agreement for the City to drop the ap-
peal and move forward with the reforms.
However, the appeal has not yet been officially dropped by the City,
and police unions are filing various motions to obstruct the process. In
the meantime, the Center continues to prepare for the reform process
and to work with our partner Communities United for Police Reform on
other strategies.
CCR’s roots stem from the 1960s civil rights movement in the American South. Our mission as well as our approach to representing movements
and clients is shaped by this history. Nowhere is this legacy more evident than in our Government Misconduct and Racial Justice docket. The Cen-
ter’s largest and most diverse docket, our work covers issues as wide-ranging as racial discrimination, solitary confinement, immigration detention,
free speech and religious profiling. Where possible, CCR employs the creative use of domestic and international law and uses litigation, advocacy,
education, and media to shift the dialogue, influence decision makers, support activists and challenge modern-day manifestations of racial, social
and economic injustice.
“No one should live in fear of being stopped whenever he leaves his home to go about the
activities of daily life.” – Judge Shira A. Scheindlin
Institutional Racism
CCR, Floyd plaintiffs, and co-counsel from Beldock, Levine & Hoffman at a press
conference announcing a victory in our lawsuit challenging the NYPD’s racially
discriminatory stop-and-frisk practices.
In August 2013, in CCR’s landmark case
Floyd v. City of New York, a federal district
judge found that the New York Police
Department (NYPD) had engaged in a
widespread practice of unconstitutional
and racially discriminatory stops and frisks.
The court ordered the appointment of an
independent monitor to oversee a collab-
orative reform process.
The watershed victory in Floyd was won
with CCR’s sound and aggressive legal
strategy, but would not have been possible
without the enormous public pressure
exerted by our partner: Communities
United for Police Reform (CPR).
CPR, of which CCR is a founding member,
is a campaign of more than 60 NGOs. It is
led by a steering committee of nine orga-
nizations, including CCR. Over the nearly
10-week Floyd trial, CPR and its member-
ship packed the court and held daily press
conferences, rallies and events to draw
public attention to how the communities
they represent were being affected by
discriminatory policing and stop and frisk.
This organizing and advocacy behind the
scenes, and in packing the court, was es-
sential in securing the ultimate victory. So
much so that CPR was recognized by the
judge who, in ordering the watershed col-
laborative reform process, named CPR as a
stakeholder.
As a stakeholder, CPR and affected com-
munities, led by CCR, will engage in the
process along with the police, elected
officials, and plaintiffs’ attorneys. Having
CPR and affected communities at the table
will play a vital role in ensuring the future
policies surrounding the practice of stop
and frisk in New York are fair and just.
CPR is also behind the multiple police
reform legislative victories of the past year,
including the passage of the Community
Safety Act by the New York City Council
in August 2013 (over the veto of former
Mayor Bloomberg) and the election of a
New York City mayor who campaigned
on the promise of reforming stop and
frisk. Further, CPR played a pivotal role in
the selection of the new NYPD Inspector
General. Overall, CPR has exerted politi-
cal pressure in numerous areas to ensure
meaningful reform of discriminatory polic-
ing practices in New York City, including
increased and coordinated documentation
of police abuse on the street and the en-
hanced ability of affected communities to
direct the reforms that dismantle discrimi-
natory policing practices.
Collaborating with Communities United for Police Reform
CPR press conference on the first day of the Floyd
trial highlighting the voices of affected individuals,
community leaders, elected officials and others.
In March, an historic settlement was reached in CCR’s
class action lawsuit Vulcan Society v. City of New York,
which charged the New York City Fire Department
(FDNY) with racially discriminatory hiring practices
spanning a period of nearly 40 years. The settlement
followed from a CCR victory at trial on some discrimi-
nation claims, which was affirmed on appeal but left
some questions open. Under the settlement, the City
will end decades of discrimination that the judge in our
case said rendered the FDNY “the last bastion of white
privilege.” By implementing court-monitored reforms,
the agreement will result in increased opportunities
for New Yorkers of color to become firefighters and
to change the culture of the FDNY to make it more
welcoming to people from all backgrounds. There is
also a significant monetary victory: the thousands of
Black and Latino victims of the City’s discriminatory
firefighter hiring exams will be eligible to receive back
pay totaling $98 million. And as a result of the case
and advocacy by CCR and our remarkable clients, the
Vulcan Society, the December 2013 class of firefight-
ers was the most diverse in NYC’s history.
Because the FDNY remains a difficult place to work
for firefighters of color, CCR continues to advocate for
victims of discrimination, and will continue to monitor
the implementation of the settlement and remedial
court orders.
Vulcan Society leaders Capt. Paul Washington and Duery Smith
flanking newly-minted firefighter Bruno Joseph after his gradu-
ation from the Firefighter Academy.
Hiring Discrimination
11
12
TARGETING OF MUSLIM AND ARAB COMMUNITIES
CCR and Muslim Advocates
appealed a court’s dismissal of
Hassan v. City of New York, the
first-ever case brought on behalf
of Muslim Americans who were
unlawfully targeted and surveilled
in New Jersey under the NYPD’s
post-9/11 human mapping
and suspicionless surveillance
program. Our clients include
a decorated Iraq war veteran,
current and former Rutgers
University students, the parent organization of the Muslim Student Association of Rutgers
University, a coalition of New Jersey mosques, and the owners and proprietors of a grade
school for Muslim girls.
CCR’s advocacy efforts work to draw connections between our longstanding law enforce-
ment abuse work, the targeting of immigrant communities and communities of color, and
the expansion of widespread surveillance in the name of national security. The NYPD’s
religious discrimination through the targeting of Muslims is a sister case to CCR’s landmark
police misconduct case, Floyd v. City of New York; both cases demonstrate egregious
unconstitutional police misconduct by the NYPD, based on nothing more than skin color
or religion, in direct violation of the U.S. Constitution.
In Tanvir v. Holder,
CCR and the CLEAR
Project at CUNY
Law School are
challenging the
federal govern-
ment’s notoriously
overbroad and
inaccurate No Fly
List in a new case
filed on behalf
of four Muslim
Americans who
were placed on the
List, not because
they posed a
threat to aviation
security, but because they refused to serve
as FBI informants to spy on their religious
communities. The government has claimed
that the No Fly List is limited to individuals
determined to be such significant threats
that they cannot step on a commercial flight.
There is no such evidence against our clients
or the thousands of others who are placed
on the List in secrecy and cannot find a way
to get off. The List is now being regularly
deployed by the FBI as a tool of coercion. In
our case, the FBI told our clients that they
would be removed from the List only if they
became government informants—a premium
resource for “counter-terrorism” efforts in
the FBI. Because of their placement on the
No Fly List, our clients have not been able to
see family overseas for years.
Government Misconduct and Racial Justice
“I have seen firsthand the damage the NYPD spying pro-
gram has done to my community and to individual Muslims
and their families, profoundly disrupting our lives at work
and at home, and our ability to worship. This surveillance
is extensive and deeply invasive, touching every part of
our community, from our religious institutions to our
businesses to our schools.”
– Imam Abdul Kareem Muhammad, Plaintiff in
Hassan
NYPD Spying
No Fly List
According to the govern-
ment’s Watchlisting Guid-
ance document, which
sets forth vague criteria for
placing individuals on the
No Fly List,“watchlisting is
not an exact science.”
13
UNJUST DETENTION
In January, CCR and the De-
tention Watch Network filed
a Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA) lawsuit seeking the im-
mediate release of documents
that the U.S. government has
refused to provide regarding the
so-called “detention bed quota,”
also known as the “detention
bed mandate” or “lockup quota,”
which Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (ICE) has interpret-
ed to require detaining 34,000
non-citizens per day. Under this
program, the money that Con-
gress gives to ICE is used to fill
what are now cells frequently run
by private prison corporations that manage civil immigration facilities;
it is an ugly incentive structure—more detentions, more money. And,
it is inextricably linked to the Obama administration’s record-breaking
deportations, which are quickly approaching two million.
CCR continues our efforts to secure justice on behalf of the
Muslim and Arab men unlawfully detained, and later deported,
in the immigration sweeps following 9/11. This lawsuit seeks
justice for a wider group of plaintiffs after our historic $1.26 mil-
lion settlement in 2009, which was on behalf of five individuals.
CCR again seeks accountability for the actions of the high-level
Bush administration architects of the 9/11 sweeps. A federal
district court judge ruled that our claims against low-level
prison officials—for imposing harsh and discriminatory condi-
tions on our clients—could proceed, but it dismissed our claims
against the high-level “architects” of this broad policy, former
Attorney General John Ashcroft and FBI Director John Meuller.
We appealed the part of the decision dismissing Ashcroft
and Mueller because this is where responsibility undoubtedly
ultimately lies.
With this case, the Center is challenging, among other things,
the unlawful conditions of confinement, including physical, ver-
bal and religious abuse, of immigrant detainees. The case also
seeks to preserve the ability of non-citizens to sue government
officials for misconduct, which is a principle that is increasingly
contested by the federal government.
DEFENDING DISSENT
In July 2013, CCR appealed the court’s
dismissal of our case, Blum v. Holder, which
challenged the Animal Enterprise Terrorism
Act (AETA) as an unconstitutional infringe-
ment on free speech. We argued the district
court erred in ruling that our plaintiffs—all
animal rights activists who are chilled by the
AETA from engaging in traditional forms of
protest—did not have standing to challenge
the legality of the AETA. The appeal also
challenged the AETA as dangerously vague
and overbroad, because it could punish tradi-
tionally protected forms of advocacy.
Unfortunately, in March, the case was
dismissed by the court of appeals in Boston.
Based on a recent Supreme Court decision,
the court adopted a new, higher standard for
permitting individuals to challenge statutes
that may infringe on free speech. The court
further held that our clients need not be
concerned about any risk to their activism
because the Department of Justice has dis-
avowed any intent to use the law to pros-
ecute First Amendment-protected protest.
CCR and our clients have appealed this deci-
sion to the United States Supreme Court.
In the meantime, the Center continues to
advise activists and provide legal support to
other animal rights and environmental activ-
ists targeted as terrorists under the AETA and
other federal and state laws.
Post-9/11 Sweeps Information Seeking and Immigrants’ Rights
Targeting of Activists
ICE agents detain record numbers of
non-citizens to ensure 34,000 remain in
detention each day.
14
PRISONERS’ RIGHTS
Government Misconduct and Racial Justice
In June, a landmark development occurred in CCR’s federal lawsuit
on behalf of prisoners at Pelican Bay State Prison who have spent
between 13 and 30 years in solitary confinement: the judge agreed
to permit CCR to represent the entire class of inmates at Pelican Bay
subject to long-term solitary confinement, ensuring the case will
have a much larger reach.
Prisoners in solitary confinement or other restrictive conditions
throughout California suspended their third hunger strike in Sep-
tember 2013 after nine weeks. Despite the California Department
of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s stubborn refusal to engage with
the prisoners, its retaliation against them, and its efforts to break the
strike, the peaceful protest successfully secured legislative hearings
that examined the inhumane conditions that thousands of prison-
ers in solitary confinement have endured for many years. Following
these public hearings, two bills were introduced in the California
Assembly that were designed to improve conditions in the SHU and
limit the offenses that can result in SHU placement.
With this case, CCR hopes to expand the law relating to the Consti-
tution’s prohibition on “cruel and unusual punishment” as applied to
solitary confinement.
Long-term Solitary Confinement as Torture
“Unless you have lived it, you cannot imagine what it feels like to be by yourself, between
four cold walls, with little concept of time, no one to confide in, and only a pillow for
comfort – for years on end. It is a living tomb.” – Gabriel Reyes
CCR continues to challenge violations of
fundamental constitutional rights at two ex-
perimental prison units, called Communica-
tion Management Units (CMUs), which the
federal government has designed to isolate
certain prisoners from the rest of the prison
population and the outside world. Despite
the fact that many CMU prisoners have nei-
ther significant disciplinary records nor any
communications-related violations, CMU
prisoners have extremely limited calls and
visitation and are forbidden from hugging,
touching or embracing their family members
during visits. Our clients have spent years
under these conditions without knowing
why they were designated to the CMUs nor
afforded a proper review process that allows
for transfer back to the general population.
Since filing, we have had important victories
and learned valuable information. Prior to
our lawsuit, the federal Bureau of Prisons
(BOP) had not transferred a single CMU
prisoner to a general population unit. Since
our case was filed, dozens of prisoners have
since been transferred out of the units.
Documents that CCR obtained during litiga-
tion reveal that our clients were explicitly
targeted for the CMU in retaliation for their
political and religious speech—speech that
is protected by the First Amendment. The
documents also show that 60 percent of
CMU prisoners are Muslim, though Muslims
comprise only six percent of the federal
prisoner population. Based on these docu-
ments, we know that CMU prisoners have
clearly been denied due process every step
of the way.
Due Process Violations and Retaliation at Experimental Prison Units
CCR, allies and activists outside the federal court building prior to a hearing
in our lawsuit challenging prolonged solitary confinement as cruel and unusual
punishment.
15
WHISTLEBLOWER SUPPORT
It appears that it is open-season on truth
tellers. In the past year alone, Chelsea
Manning was sentenced to 35 years for her
alleged disclosure of documents concern-
ing U.S. crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq
and diplomatic cables exposing the inner
workings of a seriously flawed global
system. Jeremy Hammond is serving a 10-
year sentence for disclosing emails from a
private “intelligence” firm Stratfor. Edward
Snowden, who leaked NSA documents
on surveillance, remains in Russia as the
U.S. refuses to consider amnesty. James
Risen, the New York Times reporter who
refused to name his source, lost his appeal
and WikiLeaks founder and publisher Julian
Assange passed his two-year mark since
taking refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy
in London, where he has been granted
asylum. In April, the U.S. filed legal papers
stating that Assange and WikiLeaks remain
under criminal investigation by the Depart-
ment of Justice.
Information is the life-blood of democracy;
yet our government increasingly seeks to
silence and punish those who expose their
criminality, corruption, and hypocrisy to
the public. Increasingly, cases brought by
CCR and others to expose abuses and hold
officials accountable are being dismissed
based on so-called “state secrets” and other
nearly unchallengeable grounds; and thus
whistleblowers become even more essen-
tial to providing the facts we need to make
democracy work.
The Center’s President Emeritus, Michael
Ratner, with support from CCR attor-
neys, continues to serve as U.S. counsel
to WikiLeaks and Julian Assange. That
representation has gotten more complex
since WikiLeaks was credited with helping
Snowden safely leave Hong Kong. Ratner
and CCR are involved in advocating on be-
half of other whistleblowers, journalists and
publishers who publish materials neces-
sary for making informed political choices.
Ratner travels frequently to London to meet
with Assange where he remains in the Ecua-
dorian embassy, and to Berlin for related
work and consults with the network of
other attorneys, including Baltasar Garzon,
who represent Assange in this extremely
complicated case. CCR advises Assange on
U.S. law, the complicated legal issues re-
garding extradition to the U.S. and asylum
claims. Ratner writes and speaks frequently
on behalf of CCR on these issues and has
drawn the connection between our clients’
cases and those of Manning, Hammond
and Snowden as part of a larger attack on
dissent, transparency and accountability.
Despite the jailing, forced exiles and intimi-
dation of whistleblowers and publishers,
the government is not winning this battle—
more information is being revealed and cou-
rageous people are publishing it. Ultimately,
we expect that these brave individuals who
have risked everything to force government
accountability will be seen as the heroes
they are.
“The people who ought to be prosecuted are the people who carried out the illegal acts,
the illegal surveillance, the illegal wiretapping on everything from our telephones to our
computers to every communication.” – Michael Ratner, CCR President Emeritus
Left to right: Edward Snowden, Julian Assange and Chelsea Manning.
16
International Human Rights
ANTI-GAY EXTREMISM
CCR has made great strides in the case against anti-gay extrem-
ist Scott Lively, filed on behalf of our client, Sexual Minorities
Uganda (SMUG). This is the first case using the ATS to seek
accountability for persecution on the basis of sexual orientation
and gender identity. SMUG alleges that Lively’s involvement
in Uganda, including his active participation in the formulation
of anti-gay legislation to revoke fundamental rights of LGBTIQ
persons, constitutes the crime of persecution. This case seeks
to curtail similar efforts by other anti-gay extremists by show-
ing that they, too, can be held accountable. The suit has raised
awareness of the human impact of Lively’s actions on LGBTIQ
Ugandans—whose very lives are threatened by this law—and
the role of U.S. religious extremists in promoting these policies.
In an enormous victory in August 2013, the federal court denied
Lively’s motion to dismiss (and has since denied two other similar
attempts to end the case), which is historic for three reasons:
it recognized for the first time that persecution on the basis of
sexual orientation and gender identity is a violation of interna-
tional law and a crime against humanity under the ATS—a major
win for LGBTIQ rights worldwide; it was the first positive ATS
ruling since the 2013 Supreme Court decision in Kiobel v. Royal
Dutch Petroleum/Shell (in which the Supreme Court narrowed
the scope of the ATS), building new precedent for the continued
vibrancy of ATS litigation; and it means the case will proceed,
providing a much-needed boost for our client, attracting world-
wide attention to the issue, and keeping public pressure on the
Ugandan government.
In February, the Ugandan President signed the repressive Anti-
Homosexuality Bill (AHB) into law, resulting in more arrests of
LGBTIQ Ugandans—some of whom have been tortured while in
detention. Others have gone into hiding or are seeking asylum.
The climate of persecution in Uganda, means that our clients’
existence, speech and advocacy, including this very case with
CCR, are all illegal and put them in danger—making challenging
Lively and other anti-gay extremists in equal parts delicate and
critical.
CCR’s mission is to advance and protect the rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
It is why CCR seeks to integrate an International Human Rights (IHR) frame into virtually all of our work. Whether conducting an IHR analysis
of the death penalty, pushing the limits of the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) to challenge human rights violations by corporations abroad, or using the
Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) to seek accountability for torture committed by the U.S. government, expanding and
defending human rights is at the core of so much of what CCR does.
CCR also uses international fora and advocacy to advance our clients’ interests. Whether appearing before the United Nations in Geneva to
expose the extent of sexual violence by priests against children and the failure of Vatican officials to adequately respond, or by working with
grassroots organizations in Iraq and veterans in the U.S. to show the ongoing harm caused by the U.S. invasion of Iraq—CCR goes where it must
to ensure that the U.S. respects international law both at home and abroad.
Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni signs the anti-gay legislation in
Kampala, Uganda, February 2014.
17
LITIGATION
April marked the solemn 10-year anniversary of the
publication of the deeply disturbing Abu Ghraib
photos. To date only the lowest level of military per-
sonnel have been held accountable for their actions.
This lawsuit seeks to expose the participation of
high-level U.S. officials and to hold corporations to
the same standard as individuals when they commit
human rights violations abroad.
In a watershed victory, on June 30, 2014, a federal
court of appeals ruled that CCR’s case on behalf of
victims of torture in the notorious Abu Ghraib prison could pursue their legal
claims against a private military contractor responsible for atrocities there. In
2004, U.S. military investigators determined that the U.S.-based CACI Premier
Technology, Inc. had contributed to torture and other “sadistic, blatant, and
wanton criminal abuses” at Abu Ghraib. The June decision overruled an earlier
dismissal based on Kiobel and recognized that CACI could be held liable in U.S.
courts under the Alien Tort Statue (ATS). This is the second CCR case that has
overcome the Kiobel limits on the ATS—and the first appellate court ruling to
preserve the ATS post-Kiobel—thus keeping this vital tool for holding account-
able those responsible for human rights abuses in U.S. courts.
Corporate Accountability
Early this year, CCR and our clients
were handed a bitter loss when our
lawsuit challenging the constitution-
ality of the targeted killing of three
American citizens by U.S. drones in Ye-
men in 2011 was dismissed. CCR and
the ACLU filed the case on behalf of
the families of Anwar Al-Aulaqi, Samir
Khan, and Al-Aulaqi’s 16-year-old son,
Abdulrahman.
At the request of our client, CCR will
not appeal this ruling. As Nasser Al-
Aulaqi (father to Anwar, grandfather
to Abdulrahman) stated in explaining
his decision: “I have now spent years
asking American courts to decide
whether the U.S. government can
deprive even its own citizens of life…
This isn’t justice. …I have no faith left
in a judiciary that refuses even to hear
whether Abdulrahman, an American
child, was wrongfully killed by his own
government.”
CCR continues to speak out against un-
lawful drone killings and will continue
to identify ways to raise awareness and
seek accountability for unlawful U.S.
drone attacks.
Government Misconduct
U.S. ADVOCACY
As U.S. activism in support of Palestinian
human rights increases, suppression of speech
and activities has also increased, including sup-
pression of campus solidarity activism, abuse
of Department of Education anti-discrimination
policies, use of material support laws to criminal-
ize solidarity work, and harassment of pro-
Palestinian activists. This suppression is aimed
at squelching the Boycott, Divestment and
Sanctions movement and the activities of other
groups and individuals that are sympathetic to
the Palestinian cause for self-determination and
human rights. In response to this growing need,
CCR aims to ensure that there is not a “Palestine
exception” to the First Amendment, and that
freedom of speech and assembly do not stop at
the mention of Palestine or criticism of Israel.
Palestinian Legal Support Network
CCR is working
with the Committee
of Families of the
Detained and Disap-
peared (COFADEH)
in Honduras to
demand account-
ability for the U.S.
Drug Enforcement
Agency’s role in a massacre that took place in
Ahuas, Honduras in May 2012. Four innocent ci-
vilians were killed and four others were seriously
injured in a “botched” drug interdiction mission
launched from a nearby U.S. base when security
forces opened fire on a passenger boat.
U.S. Accountability for
Post-Coup Honduran Massacre
18
INTERNATIONAL ADVOCACY
In the past year, CCR pursued investigations
and prosecutions of high-level Vatican officials
for knowingly enabling and facilitating sexual
violence against children and vulnerable adults
before two UN committees. In January, the UN
Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC)
questioned the Vatican before a room overflow-
ing with press and observers, including survi-
vors from around the world. This historic event
was the first time the Vatican has been called
to account for its actions on this issue before an
international body.
CCR and our client and partner, the Survivors
Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP),
were not disappointed with the historic and
damning report issued in February by the
Committee. Among its many recommendations,
the CRC called on the Vatican to remove all
child sexual abusers and report the abuse to the
appropriate authorities.
This year, CCR and SNAP submitted two reports
to a second UN body, the Committee Against
Torture. The Committee, which has long ad-
dressed rape and sexual violence as forms
of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading
treatment, questioned the Vatican sharply on its
compliance with the Convention Against Tor-
ture. The Committee raised serious questions
about the Vatican’s compliance with the treaty’s
obligations to prevent, punish and redress acts
of sexual violence, committed and furthered by
officials around the globe under its control.
CCR continues to use Universal Juris-
diction (UJ) to seek accountability for
the role of Bush administration officials
in the IHR violations committed as part
of the “War on Terror.” Working with
the European Center for Constitutional
and Human Rights, the International
Federation for Human Rights and the
Canadian Center for International Jus-
tice, CCR has filed cases in Germany,
France, Switzerland, Spain and Cana-
da—making travel a risky business for
many high-level U.S. officials. Our most
successful and ongoing efforts to date
have been in Spain.
In February, Spain sought to amend its
UJ law to limit cases to those with a di-
rect tie to Spain. CCR joined with other
NGOs to speak out against the pro-
posed amendment, but it was unfortu-
nately adopted. However, rather than
close the case immediately, the judge
instead asked the parties to submit
briefs on the relationship between the
new law and Spain’s international treaty
obligations. CCR argued that closing
this investigation breaches Spain’s obli-
gations under the Geneva Conventions
and Torture Convention, which require
International Human Rights
“The Committee is particularly concerned that in dealing with
allegations of child sexual abuse, the Holy See has consistently
placed the preservation of the reputation of the Church and the
protection of the perpetrators above children’s best interests…”
– UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, February 2014
Representatives from SNAP and CCR at the UN Com-
mittee Against Torture hearing in Geneva.
Vatican Impunity
Universal Jurisdiction
19
signatory states to prosecute
war crimes and torture.
In response, Spain will
continue its investiga-
tion into the alleged
torture of men formerly
detained at Guantánamo
by U.S. officials. The
judge ruled that Spain’s obli-
gations under international law to investi-
gate any credible allegation of torture took
precedence over the new restrictions, and
renewed his request for information from
the Obama administration regarding any
U.S.-based investigations into torture alle-
gations. CCR and co-counsel stand ready
to respond to the U.S. submission.
In October, Canada belatedly filed its
response to the UN Committee Against
Torture for failing to investigate and
prosecute George W. Bush during his 2011
visit, and justified its lack of action because
the authorities would not get the neces-
sary assistance from the United States.
Canada argued that any evidence “of
torture by the U.S. government resides, for
the most part, within the very centre of the
U.S. administration and with present and
former U.S. officials residing in the United
States.”
CROSSING BORDERS
The Right to Heal Initiative
Eleven years ago, many
of us rallied in the biggest
global protests ever seen
to stop the invasion of Iraq.
But we were unable to stop
the war and watched in hor-
ror as an illegal invasion and
occupation killed hundreds
of thousands of people,
and injured and poisoned
countless more. The harms
of the war will be felt for
generations.
CCR has joined Iraq Vet-
erans Against the War, the
Organization of Women’s Freedom in Iraq, and the Federation of Workers
Councils and Unions in Iraq to form a new joint project: the Right to Heal
Initiative, in order to demand that the full costs of the war be assessed and
to call for concrete action, such as the clean-up of toxic areas in Iraq and the
provision of adequate health care for veterans and Iraqis. Since the project
launched in 2013, the coalition has garnered enormous support through
outreach in U.S. Congress, signature gathering on the streets of Iraq and on-
line, media work, and public events. In a pivotal moment, in March 2014, we
organized meetings and a briefing in the U.S. Congress regarding continued
crises resulting from the war as well as a People’s Hearing on the Iraq War
moderated by Phil Donahue, that brought together Iraqi civil society leaders,
U.S. veterans, and experts in public health and human rights. As the sectar-
ian conflict reached a breaking point in June 2014, CCR helped build an
echo chamber to amplify the messages of our partners in Iraq and Iraq War
veterans critical of further U.S. military intervention.
CCR will continue to work with war impacted communities on this long-term
advocacy project to build relationships between U.S. and Iraqi civil societies
and demand the ‘Right to Heal’. Learn more at www.righttoheal.org.
CCR and Right to Heal partners with Phil Donahue
at the People’s Hearing on the Iraq War in
Washington, DC.
20
Movement Support and Advocacy
Central to CCR’s advocacy work is our commitment to promoting human dignity.
At the heart of our diverse efforts are people—the courageous movements,
impacted communities, and clients that face injustice with action and hope for
a better, more just future. It is at their lead and by their side that CCR continues
our work to dismantle unjust policies and practices at home and abroad. CCR has
successfully harnessed the power of a range of non-litigation tools and strate-
gies—organizing, public education, legislative advocacy, storytelling, and solidarity
actions—to help make critical connections between the struggles of many.
CCR’s advocacy team has had a phenomenal year. These snapshots and highlights
show the range, depth, and global reach of our advocacy work, and our brave
partners who inspire us and with whom we move in solidarity.
1
Press conference announcing victory in our stop-and-frisk case, Floyd v. City of New York.
2
Passage of Community Safety Act in New York, which
CCR helped secure as a member of Communities United for Police Reform.
3
CCR team filmed in New York and Yemen for our Guantánamo documentary.
4
Honduran soldier searches man as he enters a voting center during 2013 Honduran elections.
5
CCR partner Organization of Women’s Freedom in Iraq
collects signatures in Iraq to demand reparations from the U.S. government for the disastrous effects of war.
6
Screening of “God Loves Uganda” documen-
tary with CCR client and Executive Director of Sexual Minorities Uganda, Frank Mugisha.
7
Launch of the No Separate Justice Campaign to end human rights
abuses in federal terrorism cases.
8
Publication of CCR comic “The Case Against Scott Lively” and SMUG v. Lively advocacy booklet.
9
Members of Survivors
Network of those Abused by Priests at the Vatican review at the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child.
10
CCR, as a member of the Right to Heal Initiative,
3
4
5
21
21
15
hosts “People’s Hearing on the Lasting Impact of the Iraq War” panel and livestream.
11
CCR hosts panel discussion and livestream on U.S. Drug War and its devastating
domestic and international impact.
12
Guantánamo beach “art”; CCR travelled to the
base eight times to meet with clients.
13
&
14
Panel discussion and launch of Death
Penalty Mission Report on the World Day Against the Death Penalty.
15
Global Day
of Action to Close Guantánamo and End Indefinite Detention.
16
CCR participates
in Rutgers University event on NYPD surveillance of Muslim communities.
12 13
9
6 7
8
10
11
14
16
22
Be Just Fellows
In 2012, CCR launched
three in-house fellowships
for emerging lawyers as
part of the Bertha Founda-
tion’s global Be Just Fellows
Program. The program of-
fers three new lawyers the
opportunity to start their le-
gal career at the Center through a two-year
fellowship. Be Just Fellows are immersed in
CCR’s cases and learn the fundamentals of
the Center’s lawyering approach through
the support and mentorship of CCR attor-
neys and the BJI Director. In addition, CCR’s
Fellows are part of the global Bertha Be Just
Initiative, an international network of legal
organizations across the world.
Movement Lawyering 101 Training
This year, the BJI launched a new “Move-
ment Lawyering 101” training—a four-hour
foundational training on how lawyers can
support social movements. Over the past
year, we have trained over 800 lawyers/
law students across the country on this
method. We are now turning the facilitation
guide into a formal curriculum that will be
available online with reading resources and
interviews with current movement lawyers.
Once this is completed, we plan to distribute
the curriculum to students, law schools,
professors, legal organizations and the Be
Just Network.
Training for Practicing Lawyers
CCR hosted a CLE program this past
November with the Columbia Law School
Human Rights Institute entitled The ATS
& Transnational Accountability in the Age
of Kiobel. The course focused on the Alien
Tort Statute (ATS) as a tool for seeking
accountability for serious human rights vio-
lations, particularly in light of the Supreme
Court’s decision in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch
Petroleum. Over 200 participants attended
this program which brought together the
leading scholars and practitioners in this
specialized area of human rights litigation.
The ATS is a critical tool for accountabil-
ity by victims of corporate, individual or
governmental abuse that are unable to seek
justice in their home country. The Kiobel de-
cision may have further eroded the statute’s
protections, which made the subject matter
urgent and timely, and the need for attor-
neys to develop complementary strategies
and discuss how to move legal precedent
forward all the more important.
Global Bertha Fellows Convening
This year, CCR participated in the first ever
global convening of Bertha Fellows from
around the world. At the weeklong event
in Cape Town, South Africa, the Center’s
Bertha Fellows Chauniqua Young, Susan
Hu, and Jessica Lee met Bertha Fellows from
13 legal organizations across the world—
including from Palestine, Haiti, South Africa,
Mexico, India and the Philippines.
Bertha Justice Institute: Since 1966, CCR has been on the frontlines of using the law to ad-
vance the power of social movements. Twenty-six years ago, in recognition that students needed
a radical antidote to traditional legal programs, CCR formalized its training with the creation of
the Ella Baker Summer Internship Program. In 2010, with the generous support, vision and part-
nership of Bertha Philanthropies, CCR began building a much more ambitious and far-reaching program: the Bertha
Justice Institute (BJI), which launched in 2012. The goal of the BJI is to be an innovative training institute that will build
the next generation of “people’s lawyers.” Through the BJI, CCR is building a cadre of lawyers to support social move-
ments in the U.S. and across the world.
Bertha Justice Institute
1 2 3
23
Social Justice Conference
On June 6, 2014, the Center hosted our
third Social Justice Conference entitled 50
Years of Radical Lawyering Since Freedom
Summer. The conference marked the 50
th
anniversary of Freedom
Summer and CCR’s radi-
cal roots by profiling global
and domestic examples of
where lawyers and organizers
worked together within grass-
roots social justice move-
ments to build power. The
conference brought together
some of the most important
activists of our time and the
lawyers supporting them including: stop
and frisk in NYC, anti-LGBTIQ legislation in
Uganda, stand your ground laws in Florida,
indefinite detention at Guantánamo, torture
in Colombia, exploitation of laborers in New
Orleans, and the Marikana mineworker
massacre in South Africa. The conference
featured keynote speakers Phillip Agnew of
the Dream Defenders and long-time activist
and artist Harry Belafonte. The event drew
250 attendees representing 50 organiza-
tions from New York and across the world.
Ella Baker Program
The Ella Baker program is an intensive,
10-week summer program that uses a
combination of seminar-style classes and
field experience to train law students on
the theory and practice of being a people’s
lawyer. This past year, the BJI hosted 20
law students at three sites including: CCR;
the Institute for Justice and Democracy in
Haiti in Boston; and the Community Justice
Project of Florida Legal Services in Miami.
Ella Baker interns develop practical litigation
skills by working hand-in-hand with lawyers
on active cases and sharpen their theo-
retical understanding of social change by
interacting with community organizations
and affected individuals.
Ella Baker Alumni Network
This past year, the BJI hosted over 30 social
events, film screenings, cultural events,
talks and seminars for current and past Ella
Bakers. We invited Ella Baker alumni to par-
ticipate in Ella Baker program trainings, BJI
conferences and trainings. Through these
efforts, the BJI is helping the Center’s 200+
alumni stay in touch, continue to exchange
strategies and tactics, and most important
of all, build community. As we continue to
graduate classes of Ella Bakers, and grow
the number of Be Just Fellows, create more
training opportunities and materials to
share, the BJI is pleased to see our alumni
network grow.
1: Week-long agenda/orientation booklet from Global Bertha Fellows Convening in Cape Town. 2: Ella Baker
program closing retreat. 3: Bertha Justice Institute Director Purvi Shah with South African freedom fighter
Ahmed Kathrada who was jailed in Robben Island for over 20 years with Mandela. 4: Neijla Calvo, Jesus
Torres, and Claunick Duronville, 2014 Ella Baker Summer Interns. 5: Harry Belafonte gives closing address
at the Bertha Social Justice Conference. 6: Ella Baker Summer Orientation. 7: Bertha Social Justice Confer-
ence program. 8: Ella Baker program closing retreat.
4 5 6
7
8
Bertha Justice Institute
24
Communications
C
CR’s Communications Department
continues to build and expand its
reach and impact, thereby increas-
ing CCR’s role in public debates surrounding
issues we are litigating. Most prominently,
CCR received major press coverage this
year of our lawsuit with Muslim Advocates
against the NYPD for spying on the New
Jersey Muslim community, the granting of
class action status in our case challenging
long-term solitary confinement at California’s
Pelican Bay State Prison, the launch of our
case with CUNY Law School challenging
the No Fly List’s use to coerce Muslims into
spying on their communities, and our victory
suing the NYPD for its unconstitutional and
racially discriminatory stop-and-frisk prac-
tices. The stop-and-frisk case Floyd v. City
of New York was on the front page of the
New York Times twice this year, and was the
subject of thousands of news articles, blogs
and broadcasts. Our work helped make stop
and frisk the leading issue in the mayoral
campaign last year and contributed to over-
whelming public pressure for reform.
CCR is increasingly invited to present its
perspective in the mainstream progressive
press, appearing multiple times over the past
year on MSNBC and PBS and, of course, we
remain a mainstay on Democracy Now! Dur-
ing the period covered in this annual report
CCR was cited in over 15,000 news stories
across the country and around the world.
In the past year, CCR has placed a remark-
able 58 opinion pieces, in outlets ranging
from The Hill to Ms. Magazine and the
L.A. Times, the Star Ledger, and Al Jazeera,
not only bringing CCR’s unique voice and
political analysis to audiences everywhere,
but increasing worldwide awareness of
the issues at stake in our cases. Our com-
mitment to highlighting the voices of our
clients was best demonstrated by a series of
first-person pieces on Truthout by each of
the 10 plaintiffs in our Pelican Bay case. The
heart-wrenching piece by our client Nasser
Al-Aulaqi, “The Drone that Killed my Grand-
son,” was the most viewed article on the
New York Times website the day that it ran.
Perhaps the ultimate accomplishment in
CCR’s communications work is to shape
the narrative around an important issue,
something CCR is proud to have done in our
efforts to hold high-level Vatican officials
accountable for sexual violence by Catholic
clergy. When CCR filed a petition with the
International Criminal Court in 2011, con-
versations about the crisis still debated the
viability of holding perpetrators accountable
in various courts and the scope and scale
of the problem. Now, after the revelations
in our briefs and the targeted communica-
tions campaign augmenting our litigation
and UN advocacy work, this issue is increas-
ingly covered with the glare of the spotlight
on officials. The focus is squarely on the
seriousness of these acts, including refer-
ence to them as “violence” and “torture,”
and the Vatican’s responsibility—and failure
—to meet its international human rights
obligations. This year the Vatican was twice
summoned to appear before UN bodies and
account for it actions and inaction, and the
CCR Communications team coordinated a
multi-channel effort to amplify these historic
developments, including op eds, interna-
tional press teleconferences as well as local
press conferences in Geneva, livestreams,
and social media.
CCR’s Katherine Gallagher debates Rev. Thomas
Rosica, a Vatican spokesman, on a United Nations
report demanding that the Vatican turn over all known
and suspected clergy child sexual abusers over to
law enforcement to face investigation and possible
prosecution.
CCR’s Wells Dixon talks with Rachel Maddow about
the Bergdahl prisoner exchange and the Obama
administration’s authority to continue releasing men
from Guantánamo.
25
Our social media presence continued to
grow, deepen, and diversify. In addition to
our more than 45,000 Twitter and Facebook
followers and likes, social media puts CCR
in direct, real-time, public conversation
with journalists, opinion-makers, and other
advocates. As a prominent voice on the
social media stage, the public and journalists
alike turn to CCR for timely, thoughtful, and
unique insight into dozens of human rights
and civil rights issues.
This year, we are producing more videos
than ever, ranging from short pieces for so-
cial media to longer mini-documentaries. Of
particular note is the year-long project, just
completed, to tell the story of Fahd Ghazy,
one of the first detainees at Guantánamo
and a CCR client. With the help of the New
Media Advocacy Project and funding from
the Bertha Foundation, we traveled to Ye-
men to interview Fahd’s family and produce
a compelling story that we are now planning
an extensive campaign around for the
coming year. You can learn more at
ccrjustice.org/fahd.
We are also in the middle of full redesign of
the CCR website, a 16-month project that
will result in a brand new web presence in
early 2015, fully integrating our social media
properties and microsites with our main site,
ccrjustice.org. This project is a significant
investment in our ongoing effort to expand
our capacity, reach and impact.
All of this work is accomplished with a
talented staff working to maximize our
resources and our reach, along with help
from our longtime media consultants at
Riptide Communications. We could not
do this work without our CCR supporters;
whether giving a gift, sharing a story or
following us on Twitter, you are a part of
our success and our increased impact.
FDNY Discrimination
Lawsuit is Finally Settled
New Jersey Muslims Appeal
Federal Ruling on NYPD Surveillance
Lawsuit: FBI Used No Fly List
Threat Against Muslims
Scott Lively Will Be Tried for Fueling
Antigay Persecution in Uganda
UN Denounces Vatican Over Child Abuse
and Demands Immediate Action
Lawsuit Challenges Animal Rights
Activism Terror Law
Left: CCR’s Darius Charney gives an overview of the significance of the historic stop-and-frisk ruling. Right: CCR’s Omar
Farah discusses debate on the fears we should ignore to preserve freedom and those that should be confronted to
strengthen security.
Communications
26
Last August, in
a usually sleepy
month, we received
two unprecedented
decisions in our
cases. First, in Floyd
v. City of New York,
the federal district
court in New York
ruled, following our nine-week trial, that the
New York Police Department’s divisive stop-
and-frisk program has been systematically
violating the Fourth Amendment rights of all
New Yorkers and that the largest police force
in the country was unlawfully targeting Blacks
and Latinos in violation of the Constitutional
guarantee of Equal Protection. Just a few days
later, in Sexual Minorities Uganda v. Lively, a
federal judge in Massachusetts held that our
case against anti-gay extremist minister Scott
Lively for his conspiratorial role in persecuting
LGBTI persons in Uganda could proceed and
ruled for the first time that sexual orientation
and gender identity—just like race, religion,
gender—are protected under international
human rights law. The sheer audacity of these
cases and the rulings they produced continues
CCR’s radical litigation approach and framed
our work for the rest of the year.
In Floyd, after a politically hostile court of
appeals panel tried to subvert the district
judge’s ruling, CCR’s litigation, organizing and
activism kicked into high gear, pressuring the
new mayor, Bill de Blasio, to drop the appeal
and proceed with court ordered reforms of the
NYPD. In a dramatic joint press conference in
the Brownsville Recreation Center in Brooklyn,
the new mayor, standing next to Vince Warren
and CCR client Nicholas Peart, promised to
do just that. Our negotiations with the less-
hostile de Blasio administration continued in
other places, creating a final settlement of our
remaining claims in Vulcans v. City of New
York, which requires serious reforms to the
recruitment, hiring and promotion of Black
firefighters, and millions of dollars in back pay.
The settlement capped a 40-year struggle of
the Vulcan Society and this year, produced the
most diverse firefighter class in New York City
histor y.
Our prisoners’ rights cases are proceeding on
pace. In our challenge to the federal govern-
ment’s Kafkaesque “Communications Man-
agement Units,” we’ve assembled a wealth of
evidence for the district court showing that this
disciplinary system is arbitrary and unconsti-
tutional. And in our challenge to long-term
solitary confinement at the notorious Pelican
Bay prison in California, the court granted our
request to represent the entire class of indi-
viduals subject to the soul-and-body-destroy-
ing effects of prolonged isolation. CCR is using
Freedom of Information Act litigation to force
transparency around the increasingly punitive
detention practices in our immigration policy.
Our International Human Rights docket contin-
ued our work for international solidarity, justice
and accountability. We continued our alliance
with the amazing Survivors Network of those
Abused by Priests (SNAP). Our filings with the
United Nations accountability mechanisms
forced Vatican officials, for the first time, to
face survivors of its policies and to answer
aggressive questioning by UN officials—
which produced strong international pressure
demanding that the Vatican take responsibility
for its documented role to cover up and abet
priest sexual violence against children. The
last of our three cases against private military
contractors for their role in torture and abuse
of Iraqi prisoners in Abu Ghraib, Al Shimari v.
CACI, was initially dismissed following the
Supreme Court’s Kiobel decision, but the
appeals court overturned the decision and
upheld the use of the Alien Tort Statute. Our
work defending Palestinian human rights
activists took on particular urgency in light of
an uptick in campus crackdowns on lawful pro-
tests and state legislative attempts to punish
academic organizations encouraging boycotts
of Israeli universities.
Our Guantánamo and related national security
work continues as resilient as ever despite
enormous challenges. Since last year’s hunger
strike 17 men have been transferred from
Guantánamo, including CCR client Djamel
Ameziene, who is with his family in Algeria and
on a slow path to recovery. Still, on this, the
10
th
anniversary of our Supreme Court victory
in Rasul v. Bush, 149 men remain, stuck in a
political-judicial vortex we are continuing to
contain. Our case challenging the “targeted
killing” of U.S. citizens in Yemen, Al-Aulaqi v.
Obama, was dismissed by the district court
and our clients, after years of agonizing frustra-
tion with the U.S. judicial system, chose not to
appeal. Our challenge to the NYPD’s program
of “human mapping” and suspicionless surveil-
lance of Muslims in New Jersey was dismissed
by a district court ruling which fully embraced
the program’s grossly discriminatory premises,
but we are confident about our appeal. And,
furthering our attempts to challenge domestic
law enforcement manifestations of the “War
on Terror,” we filed a challenge to the FBI’s
standardless No Fly List and the FBI’s practice
of placing Muslims on the list as a condition for
becoming informants on their community—a
practice that violates their rights to free asso-
ciation and freedom of religion.
In the following pages, you will find more infor-
mation on the breadth of issues we’ve covered
through our cases and joint projects with our
partners.
Message from the Legal Director
Baher Azmy, Legal Director
27
Al-Bihani v. Obama
Representation of Ghaleb Al-Bihani, a Yemeni
citizen held at Guantánamo for over 12 years
without charge or trial. His habeas petition was
denied based on a finding that he was an assis-
tant cook for a group allegedly associated with
the Taliban. The ruling was twice upheld by
the D.C. Circuit, once by a three-judge panel
which concluded that international law was not
applicable in its review of Al-Bihani’s detainabil-
ity, and again by the full court, the majority of
which concluded that the panel’s international
law ruling was unnecessary, but that he was
nonetheless detainable. The Supreme Court
declined to review the case.
Status: Al-Bihani was cleared for transfer by
the Periodic Review Board in May 2014, yet he
remains in Guantánamo.
Al-Hamiri v. Obama
Habeas petition filed on behalf of Mohammed
Al-Hamiri, a Yemeni citizen who was raised
in Saudi Arabia. Al-Hamiri suffered severe
cranial injuries as a young man and traveled to
Pakistan in search of affordable medical care.
He crossed the border into Afghanistan shortly
before the 9/11 attacks and was arrested by po-
lice in Pakistan as he fled the ensuing conflict.
He was then transferred to Guantánamo where
he has been detained for more than 12 years.
Al-Hamiri has never been charged with a crime
and is approved for transfer. In January 2011,
the D.C. district court heard oral argument
on his habeas petition. The presiding judge
in Al-Hamiri’s case retired without rendering
a decision. The case was transferred to a new
judge who has called for additional argument in
the matter.
Status: Decision pending; awaiting scheduling
of further oral argument.
Al Qahtani v. Obama
Habeas petition for Mohammed al Qahtani, vic-
tim of the United States’ extraordinarily abusive
“First Special Interrogation Plan,” “enhanced
interrogation techniques” personally authorized
by Donald Rumsfeld. He is the only detainee
the U.S. admits to torturing. This torture pro-
gram violated both domestic and international
law, and leaves U.S. officials open to war crimes
charges.
Status: The case has been stayed since October
2010.
Center for Constitutional Rights v. Depart-
ment of Defense (Al Qahtani FOIA)
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit
seeking public disclosure of videotapes of Mo-
hammed al Qahtani made when he was in soli-
tary confinement immediately prior to a period,
detailed in a log published by TIME Magazine
in 2006, in which al Qahtani was systemati-
cally tortured. Al Qahtani’s attorneys at CCR
have viewed the tapes, but are prohibited from
discussing their contents, including confirming
or denying whether they contain footage of
abuse. The suit also seeks certain photographs
of al Qahtani.
Status: CCR moved for summary judgment, but
the district court dismissed the lawsuit, accept-
ing the government’s arguments for secrecy.
CCR as plaintiff appealed to the Second Circuit
and the appeal was argued in June 2014 by pro
bono counsel Gibbons, P.C.
Al-Zahrani v. United States
CCR brought a civil suit on behalf of the
families of Yasser Al-Zahrani of Saudi Arabia
and Salah Al-Salami of Yemen, who died at
Guantánamo in June 2006 along with a third
man, Mani Al-Utaybi. While the military claims
that the men committed suicide, four soldiers
stationed at Guantánamo at the time later came
forward with first-hand accounts, as reported
by Scott Horton in Harper’s Magazine, suggest-
ing that the military covered up the actual cause
and circumstances of the deaths, and that the
Guantánamo Bay
Case Index
On May 23, a year after President Obama recommitted to closing Guantánamo and lifted the ban on transfers to Yemen, CCR
joined activists around the globe to hold him accountable.
Guantánamo
28
men may have been killed at a secret site at
Guantánamo. The case was dismissed and
appealed to the D.C. Circuit, which affirmed,
holding that the courts lacked jurisdiction over
the case under the Military Commissions Act.
CCR then filed a petition at the Inter-American
Commission on Human Rights requesting that
the body review the case. Since then, addi-
tional evidence of a cover-up has been revealed
by Scott Horton and the Seton Hall Law Center
for Policy & Research.
Status: The IACHR petition is pending an ad-
missibility decision.
Ameziane v. Obama
Ameziane v. United States
Habeas petition on behalf of Djamel Ameziane,
an Algerian man who was never charged with
any crime and was held at Guantánamo from
2002 to December 2013. Ameziane suffered
serious abuse in the prison, including profound
isolation in solitary confinement, and required
urgent resettlement protection to keep the U.S.
government from returning him to Algeria, a
country he fled nearly 20 years ago to escape
violence, instability and oppression. In 2012,
the D.C. Circuit unsealed documents reveal-
ing government admissions that Ameziane
was long cleared for transfer, his detention
was “no longer at issue,” and he should be
released. In 2008, CCR filed a petition with the
Inter-American Commission on Human Rights
(IACHR). The IACHR accepted jurisdiction over
Ameziane’s case, the first time it had done so in
a case of a Guantánamo detainee, underscor-
ing the fact that there has been no effective
domestic remedy available to victims of unjust
detentions and other abuses at the base.
Status: Over CCR’s and Ameziane’s objections
he was forcibly repatriated to Algeria in Decem-
ber 2013. We continue to litigate his habeas
case in order to clear his name and get back
property that was seized from him at the time
of his capture. We also continue to pursue his
case before the IACHR, which will examine the
human rights violations suffered by Ameziane,
including his harsh conditions of confinement,
the abuses inflicted on him, the illegality of his
detention, and his forced transfer.
Ba Odah v. Obama
Habeas petition filed on behalf of Tariq Ba
Odah, who is a Yemeni citizen and lifelong resi-
dent of Saudi Arabia. Ba Odah has never been
charged with a crime, and recently disclosed
documents show that the Guantánamo Task
Force has approved Ba Odah for transfer. Ba
Odah requires urgent release from Guantá-
namo for humanitarian and medical reasons. He
has been on a peaceful unbroken hunger strike
at Guantánamo since February 2007 to protest
his indefinite detention, now in its second de-
cade. Guards at Guantánamo continue to strap
him to a restraint chair every morning and night
and force-feed him in an excruciating process
by inserting a tube through his nasal passage.
He is also held in near complete isolation as
punishment for his refusal to end his strike.
Status: Court granted voluntary motion to
dismiss without prejudice in March 2014. CCR
continues to advocate for the release of Ba
Odah and our other cleared Yemeni clients,
who remain detained almost entirely because
of their citizenship.
Barhoumi v. Obama
Habeas petition on behalf of an Algerian
national who has had three sets of military
commission charges brought against him and
all dropped. CCR also represents Barhoumi as
civilian military commission defense counsel.
Status: The district court rejected a motion to
reconsider its denial of the habeas petition,
based on new evidence belatedly turned over
by the government. The government continues
to refuse to charge Barhoumi with any offense.
Guantánamo Bay
Case Index
Djamel Ameziane is an Algerian refugee who has been
detained at Guantánamo since 2002. In December 2013, the
U.S. transferred him to Algeria against his will.
Tariq Ba Odah is a Yemeni-national who has been detained
at Guantánamo since February 2002. He has spent one-third
of his life in Guantánamo without charge.
29
Celikgogus v. Rumsfeld
Allaithi v. Rumsfeld
Civil suits against Donald Rumsfeld and oth-
ers responsible for the detention, torture and
mistreatment of six men illegally detained in
Guantánamo for years, including three men
released years after being classified as non-
enemy combatants.
Status: The district court dismissed the cases.
CCR appealed to the D.C. Circuit, but in
June 2014, the Court of Appeals affirmed the
dismissal.
Fahd Ghazy
Habeas petition filed on behalf of Yemeni
detainee Fahd Ghazy and later voluntarily with-
drawn without prejudice. Ghazy was detained
at Guantánamo roughly four months before
his 18th birthday, making him one of the last
remaining men at Guantánamo to be detained
as a minor. He has never been charged and has
been approved for transfer by both Presidents
Bush and Obama. Ghazy is fluent in English and
Arabic. He graduated first in his high school
class and won a scholarship to Sana’a Univer-
sity. Ghazy’s daughter, who was only months
old when he was detained, his wife, brothers,
and extended family are in Yemen waiting to be
reunited with him.
Status: Ghazy has been cleared for transfer
since 2007 and advocacy efforts to secure his
release are ongoing.
Hamad v. Gates (amicus)
CCR submitted an amicus brief in support of
a former Guantánamo detainee’s request that
the Supreme Court review the lower court’s
dismissal of his case seeking damages for abuse
suffered in detention. CCR argued that the
lower courts wrongly decided that Congress
has the power to forbid federal courts from
even considering such claims by former Guan-
tánamo detainees, a question with fundamental
implications for the separation of powers be-
tween Congress and the Judiciary. If Congress
has the power to bar all consideration of federal
legal questions (arising from statutes, treaties,
or the Constitution itself) then vast classes of
litigants may equally be at risk of having their
claims thrown out of court wholesale by future
Congressional actions.
Status: The Supreme Court denied certiorari in
June 2014.
Hicks v. United States
Appeal on behalf of former Guantánamo
detainee David Hicks, an Australian citizen,
challenging his military commission conviction
for providing material support for terrorism on
two grounds: (1) the military commission was
without jurisdiction to convict him for material
support; and (2) his guilty plea was involuntary
because it was obtained under torture. Hicks
seeks to invalidate his conviction and, finally,
clear his name. His appeal is based on a D.C.
Circuit ruling in Hamdan v. United States,
which held that providing material support for
terrorism is not a war crime that can be charged
and tried by military commission.
Status: Appeal stayed pending further court
review in Al Bahlul v. United States.
IACHR Precautionary Measures
on Guantánamo
Petition filed with the Inter-American Commis-
sion on Human Rights requesting a hearing and
granting of precautionary measures regarding
detention policy at Guantánamo and related
issues.
Status: The IACHR granted the request for pre-
cautionary measures. In July 2013, the IACHR
expanded the scope of the precautionary mea-
sures, ordering the U.S. to immediately close
the facility, transfer detainees to their home or
safe third countries, expedite release of those
cleared, and provide due process rights and ap-
propriate conditions of detention to detainees
referred for trial.
United States v. Khan
In February 2012, Majid Khan, who was
secretly held and tortured in CIA detention for
several years prior to his transfer to Guantána-
mo, was charged before a military commission
with various offenses. He pled guilty to those
offenses pursuant to a pretrial agreement with
the prosecution. He will be sentenced within
four years of the date of his guilty plea. This
case supersedes Khan’s habeas petition, Khan
v. Obama, which was dismissed pursuant to his
plea agreement.
Status: Khan faces between 0 to 19 years of
imprisonment at sentencing, minus credit for
time served from the date of his guilty plea.
CCR filed an appeal on behalf of former Guantánamo
detainee David Hicks seeking to vacate his conviction in the
military commissions.
Guantánamo Bay
Case Index
30
Khan Tumani v. Obama
Habeas petition filed on behalf of a Syrian
father and son, Abdul Nasser and Muhammed
Khan Tumani, who were detained apart at
Guantánamo for over seven years without
charge. Muhammed was a juvenile when he
came into U.S. custody and was separated from
his father for the duration of his detention. Both
men were ultimately cleared for release and
resettled; Muhammed in Portugal in 2009, and
his father in Cape Verde a year later.
Status: Ongoing efforts for their rehabilitation
and reunification. Father and son remain sepa-
rated and have not been allowed to see each
other to date.
Kiyemba v. Obama (I and III)
Coordinated habeas petitions filed on behalf
of 17 Chinese Uighurs held at Guantánamo,
who won their cases in 2008. A federal judge
ordered the Uighurs, members of a perse-
cuted minority in China, to be released into
the United States since they were unable to
return to China for fear of torture and persecu-
tion and did not have a third country to accept
them. The D.C. Circuit reversed in Kiyemba
I, and the Supreme Court granted review to
consider whether a habeas court has power
to order actual release from custody in these
circumstances. The Uighurs were then offered
resettlement in third countries, which all but
five of them accepted, and the Supreme Court
vacated Kiyemba I and remanded. In Kiyemba
III, the D.C. Circuit reinstated Kiyemba I.
Status: The last three Uighurs at Guantánamo
were transferred to Slovakia in December 2013,
more than five years after their exoneration
and subsequent indefinite detention, which the
court determined was unlawful.
Othman v. Obama
Habeas petition for Khaled Abd Elgabar Mo-
hammed Othman of Yemen. Yemenis comprise
88 of the 149 still detained at Guantánamo.
Status: The district court stayed Othman’s case
in late 2008. The President officially lifted his
moratorium on transfers to Yemen in mid-2013
but has still not transferred a single cleared
Yemeni home since 2010.
Al Shimari v. CACI
Filed in 2008, this lawsuit on behalf of four Iraqi
civilians alleges that employees of a private
military contracting corporation (CACI Premier
Tech., Inc.) conspired to commit torture at the
notorious Abu Ghraib prison. The complaint
alleges that CACI employees ordered military
police to “soften up” detainees for interroga-
tion, which caused our clients to suffer electric
shocks, beatings, painful stress positions and
sexual humiliation and alleges the corporation
attempted to cover up reports of abuse from
the U.S. Government and the International
Committee of the Red Cross so it could con-
tinue to reap millions in profits from the war.
Status: Following a number of appeals and
discovery in the district court, in June 2013,
the district court dismissed the case following
the Supreme Court’s Kiobel decision limiting
the extraterritorial application of the Alien Tort
CCR staff and allies in NYC’s Times Square on the Global Day of Action to Close Guantánamo and End Indefinite Detention.
Guantánamo Bay/Corporate and Institutional Accountability
Case Index
Corporate and
Institutional
Accountability
Since 2004, CCR has represented over 340 Iraqis suing
private military contractors for their role in torture at Abu
Ghraib and facilities throughout Iraq.
31
Statute. Plaintiffs’ appeal of that decision to the
Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals was success-
ful, as the court held in a June 2014 decision
that human rights abuses committed by a U.S.
corporation at a U.S.-controlled prison in a
conspiracy with U.S. soldiers is sufficiently
connected to the United States so as not to be
considered “extraterritorial” under Kiobel. The
case has been remanded again to the district
court for further proceedings.
Mamilla Cemetery Human Rights Campaign
International advocacy supporting descen-
dants of people buried in the historic Muslim
Mamilla Cemetery in Jerusalem who seek to
halt construction of a “Museum of Tolerance”
atop the cemetery by the Los Angeles-based
Simon Wiesenthal Center, to re-bury the
removed remains, and to protect and preserve
the remaining cemetery.
Status: Plans to construct the “Museum of Tol-
erance” persist; CCR continues its work to stop
desecration of the cemetery.
Al-Aulaqi v. Panetta
Civil suit brought with the ACLU against senior
CIA, Department of Defense and Joint Special
Operations Command officials for the drone
killings of U.S. citizens Anwar Al-Aulaqi, Samir
Khan, and Anwar Al-Aulaqi’s 16-year-old son,
Abdulrahman, in two strikes in Yemen in 2011.
Status: After oral argument in July 2013, the
District Court in Washington, DC dismissed the
case in April 2014, finding that “special factors”
of war-making, national security, and foreign
policy precluded a judicial remedy for violations
of constitutional rights. Faced with the pros-
pect of having to relive these tragic events in
another legal process, and their belief that the
U.S. justice system has failed them, our clients
chose not to appeal. CCR will continue this
work through other forms of advocacy.
Al-Majalah Freedom of Information Act
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests
submitted with the ACLU, for documents
pertaining to U.S. airstrikes in December 2009
on the village of al-Majalah in Yemen, in which
dozens of civilian bystanders were killed,
including 21 children.
Status: Administrative requests are pending.
Bush Torture Indictment
A criminal indictment against George W. Bush
for torture filed in British Columbia, Canada
in October 2011 on behalf of four individuals
who had been subjected to the U.S. torture
program.
Status: Following Canada’s failure to initiate a
criminal investigation against Bush under the
Convention Against Torture, the plaintiffs filed
a complaint with the UN Committee Against
Torture against Canada, which is pending.
CCR v. Department of Defense et al.
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit
seeking the release of U.S. records pertaining
to U.S. policy towards the blockade of Gaza
and regarding the May 2010 attack by Israel,
in international waters, on a flotilla seeking to
break the siege and deliver humanitarian aid to
Gaza.
Status: In response to the filing of the case in
May 2011, more than 8,000 pages of docu-
ments have been released. CCR continues to
challenge the withholding and redactions of
documents and has summarized and analyzed
the documents, grouping them thematically, so
advocates can locate and make use of them.
CCR v. Obama
Challenge to NSA warrantless domestic elec-
tronic surveillance, asserting that it violated
the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and
the First and Fourth Amendments. The lawsuit
was brought on behalf of CCR attorneys seek-
ing to protect our clients’ right to confidential
attorney-client communications. At this stage of
the litigation, the only remaining claim centered
on our request that the court order the govern-
ment to destroy any records of surveillance that
it still retains from the illegal NSA program.
Status: In January 2011, the district judge
dismissed all plaintiffs’ claims. CCR appealed.
The case was set for argument on June 1, 2012,
but 11 days beforehand, the Supreme Court
granted cert in a similar case, Clapper v. Am-
nesty International, and the Ninth Circuit stayed
our appeal pending the Supreme Court’s deci-
sion. Following the Supreme Court decision, the
Ninth Circuit dismissed CCR’s appeal in June
2013. CCR then appealed to the full Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; that appeal was
denied in October 2013. CCR filed a petition
seeking review by the Supreme Court in January
2014, which the Court rejected in March 2014.
Government Accountability
Case Index
Government
Accountability
CCR legal team in front of courthouse for argument on
drone killings of U.S. citizens.
32
CCR v. United States
CCR v. Lind
A petition for extraordinary relief filed in the
military appeals courts, seeking access to
documents in the court-martial proceedings for
Private First Class Chelsea (formerly Bradley)
Manning, including the government’s motion
papers, the court’s own orders, and transcripts
of proceedings, none of which had been made
public by the court-martial.
Status: The Army Court of Criminal Appeals de-
nied relief. CCR filed its appeal to the Court of
Appeals for the Armed Forces which held by a
3-2 vote that it lacked jurisdiction over claims of
members of the public and media seeking ac-
cess to a court-martial. The plaintiffs then filed
a new lawsuit, CCR v. Lind, in federal court in
Baltimore. The day before the government had
to respond to that suit, it published versions of
almost 500 of the documents we had sought for
over a year. The case was voluntarily dismissed
in January 2014, after the government posted
redacted transcripts of classified sessions of
the Manning trial, as well as several hundred
defense and prosecution trial exhibits.
Haiti – IACHR Precautionary Measures on
U.S. Deportations
In January 2011, CCR and partner organiza-
tions filed an emergency petition with the
Inter-American Commission on Human Rights
(IACHR) to halt the roundup, detention and
imminent deportation by the U.S. of hundreds
of Haitian nationals being sent back to cholera-
ridden detention facilities in post-earthquake
Haiti. The petition argues that deporting people
to Haiti while it is still reeling from the devastat-
ing 2010 earthquake, and is burdened with a
massive cholera epidemic, political unrest, and
rampant street violence, would result in serious
human rights violations, including deprivations
of the rights to life, family, and due process and
of freedom from cruel or unusual punishment.
Status: The IACHR expanded the precaution-
ary measures to cover additional people facing
deportation to Haiti. The U.S. is still actively
removing people to Haiti, and CCR and its
partners have continued to file updates and
requests with the IACHR.
Honduras Freedom of Information Act
CCR represents journalist Jeremy Bigwood
and the True Commission, the alternative truth
commission formed by Honduran civil society,
around requests for records from the U.S.
government regarding various U.S. interests,
actors, or agencies and their knowledge of or
role in the 2009 coup d’état in Honduras. CCR
supported the efforts to understand the root
causes of the coup, to ensure accountability for
human rights violations stemming from it, and
to achieve genuine truth and reconciliation in
Honduras. CCR represents Bigwood in a FOIA
lawsuit, Bigwood v. DOD, challenging the with-
holding of documents responsive to Bigwood’s
requests. This case takes place in the context of
CCR’s broader solidarity work in Honduras.
Status: Since CCR filed Bigwood v. DOD in
March 2011, the Department of Defense has
turned over a number of documents. CCR con-
tinues to fight for release of more information
and transparency around U.S. foreign policy in
Honduras. Summary judgment briefing is com-
plete, and the Court’s decision is pending.
Mamani v. Sánchez de Lozada and Sánchez
Berzaín
Cases against former president and former
minister of defense of Bolivia for their roles in
the killing of civilians during popular protests
against the Bolivian government in September
and October 2003.
Status: Amended complaint filed June 2013;
defendants’ motion to dismiss denied in part in
May 2014. Defendants have filed a motion to
certify for interlocutory appeal that is currently
being briefed.
Government Accountability
Private First Class Chelsea Manning was sentenced to 35
years in prison for her alleged disclosure of documents
concerning U.S. crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq, pictured as
she sees herself.
Case Index
Silvia Mencías holds a photo of her son Isis Obed Murillo
who was killed by Honduran military forces during the 2009
coup d’état.
33
Spanish Investigation into the
U.S. Torture Program
The Center has made filings in two cases
brought under Spain’s universal jurisdiction
laws that seek to hold former high-ranking U.S.
officials accountable for their individual roles in
directing, implementing or planning the U.S.
torture program. Spain investigated whether
U.S. officials undertook “an authorized and
systematic plan of torture and ill-treatment on
persons” in U.S. detention facilities in violation
of international law. A case filed against the
“Bush Six”—David Addington, Jay S. Bybee,
Douglas Feith, Alberto R. Gonzales, William J.
Haynes, and John Yoo (lawyers from the Bush
administration)—for torture and war crimes is
on appeal before the Spanish Constitutional
Court, with CCR having filed an amicus to the
Supreme Court.
Status: Appeal of the closure of the “Bush Six”
case is pending before the Spanish Constitu-
tional Court. Following amendment of Spain’s
universal jurisdiction statute limiting its ap-
plicability, the investigating magistrate affirmed
his continued jurisdiction over the ongoing
investigation into the global torture program.
French Investigation into the U.S. Torture
Program
The Center, with the European Center for Con-
stitutional and Human Rights, submitted a dos-
sier to the High Court of Paris setting forth the
criminal responsibility of former Guantánamo
commander Geoffrey Miller, and called on the
court to subpoena him in the ongoing investiga-
tion into torture at Guantánamo.
Status: The French judge declined to subpoena
Miller, but the investigation remains open.
Aref v. Holder
Challenging policies and practices at two ex-
perimental prison units called Communications
Management Units (CMUs), highly restrictive
federal prison units that segregate certain
prisoners from the general prison population
and the outside world, closely monitoring and
controlling these prisoners’ communications
through a complete ban on any physical contact
with visiting friends and family and severely
restricted access to phone calls, work, and edu-
cational opportunities. Individuals are desig-
nated to CMUs with no meaningful explanation
and without a clear way to seek return to the
general population—a due process violation
that allows for the abuse of power, retaliation
and racial and religious profiling. 60% of these
prisoners are Muslim, and many others have
“unpopular” political views, including environ-
mental activists designated as “eco-terrorists.”
Status: Discovery has been completed and
both parties have moved for summary judg-
ment. We hope for a final decision in the case
later this year.
Floyd v. City of New York
A class action lawsuit challenging the current
“stop-and-frisk” policy and practice of the New
York City Police Department (NYPD) as uncon-
stitutional and racially discriminatory. These
NYPD practices have led to a dramatic increase
in the number of suspicionless stop-and-frisks
occurring per year, with the vast majority of
stops taking place in communities of color and
with the greatest impact on Blacks and Latinos.
This case stems from CCR’s landmark racial
profiling case, Daniels v. City of New York,
which was settled in 2003. That settlement
ended the notorious Street Crimes Unit after
the outrage over the death of Amadou Diallo,
and required the NYPD to maintain and report
stop-and-frisk data—provisions that have al-
lowed the Center to build our Floyd case and
work towards systemic reform of NYPD stop-
and-frisk policies and practices.
Status: In August 2013, the District Judge ruled
that the NYPD’s stop-and-frisk practices were
unconstitutional and appointed a court monitor
to oversee policy reforms. The City appealed
that ruling. In October 2013, the Court of Ap-
peals stayed the District Court ruling pending
the outcome of the appeal. The City’s appeal is
still pending.
Government Accountability/Policing and Prisons
Mayor Bill de Blasio announces that the City has agreed
to drop the appeal in CCR’s stop-and-frisk case, alongside
CCR client Nicholas Peart and CCR Executive Director Vince
Warren.
Case Index
Policing and Prisons
New Yorkers rally outside the courthouse when CCR
put the NYPD on trial for its unconstitutional
and racially discriminatory stop-and-frisk policy
and practice.
34
Fahad Hashmi
Representation of Fahad Hashmi, a U.S. citizen
of Pakistani origin who grew up in Queens,
NY, to challenge his solitary confinement at
the Administrative Maximum (ADX) prison in
Florence, Colorado—the country’s only federal
“supermax” prison. Hashmi was held in 22- to
24-hour solitary confinement at ADX for three
years, after being convicted of providing mate-
rial support to Al Qaeda. His “support” consti-
tuted storing waterproof socks and ponchos
in his apartment for two weeks that were later
allegedly delivered to an Al Qaeda member
in Pakistan. Hashmi pled guilty to one count
of material support after being held for nearly
three years in pre-trial solitary confinement and
under Special Administrative Measures (SAMs)
at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New
York.
Status: Hashmi was transferred out of ADX
in June 2014, ending seven years of solitary
confinement.
Hassan v. City of New York
First and Fourteenth Amendment challenge
to the New York Police Department’s (NYPD)
human-mapping and surveillance program of
Muslim Americans in New Jersey. Petitioners in-
clude businesses, organizations, and individuals
who were subjected to the NYPD’s surveillance
program. Internal NYPD documents reveal that
its sole basis for targeting plaintiffs was their
religious affiliation in clear violation of the core
constitutional principles of freedom of religion
and equality under the law.
Status: The federal District Court of New Jersey
dismissed the case without oral argument on
February 20, 2014; plaintiffs appealed to the
Third Circuit.
Patel v. Arpaio
While serving as a legal observer for the Na-
tional Lawyers Guild, CCR attorney Sunita Patel
was arrested without cause at protests against
SB1070 in front of Sheriff Arpaio’s jail in Phoe-
nix. Charges were later dismissed. This case
challenges her unlawful arrest and Arpaio’s
practice of excessive force and repressive law
enforcement in Arizona. Suspicions that Arpaio
had been targeting those working on immigrant
rights issues were confirmed when the Depart-
ment of Justice investigated and issued findings
that Arpaio targets legal advocates, lawyers and
judges in an effort to silence them.
Status: The case was dismissed; CCR attorneys,
along with the Center for Social Justice at Seton
Hall Law School, have filed an appeal to the
dismissal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit. We are awaiting an oral argument
date.
Ashker v. Brown
In May 2012, CCR filed a federal class action
suit on behalf of prisoners at Pelican Bay State
Prison who have spent between 10 and 28
years in solitary confinement in the Security
Housing Units (SHU). The case grew out of a
2011 hunger strike by thousands of California
prisoners protesting the inhumane conditions.
Originally filed by our client as a pro se suit,
CCR and several advocate and legal organiza-
tions in California joined the case, alleging that
prolonged solitary confinement violates Eighth
Amendment prohibitions against cruel and
unusual punishment, and that the absence of
meaningful review for SHU placement violates
the prisoners’ right to due process.
Status: The court denied defendants’ motion
to dismiss our claims in April 2013 and certified
the class in June 2014. Meanwhile, discovery is
underway.
Tanvir v. Holder
Tanvir v. Holder is a federal lawsuit brought
by four American Muslim men (Muhammad
Tanvir, Jameel Algibhah, Naveed Shinwari, and
Awais Sajjad). The four were placed on the
federal government’s notoriously overbroad
and inaccurate “No Fly List,” not because they
pose a threat to aviation security, but because
they refused to serve as government informants
against innocent members of their religious
community.
Status: Amended complaint filed April 2014.
Policing and Prisons
As part of a series of vigils organized by the No Separate
Justice Campaign, CCR and allies call for Fahad Hashmi to
be transferred out of solitary confinement.
Marie Levin is interviewed about keeping in touch with her
brother, CCR client Ronnie Dewberry, who has spent the last
23 years in solitary confinement.
Case Index
35
U.S. v. Mehanna (amicus)
Amicus brief filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the First Circuit in support of the reversal
of Tarek Mehanna’s conviction for material
support to Al Qaeda. CCR’s brief argued that
the government’s prosecution, on the basis
of Mehanna’s translations and other speech,
penalized activity that was protected by the
First Amendment as independent advocacy and
core political speech. The First Circuit upheld
his conviction, and Mehanna’s petition for
rehearing en banc was denied. He filed a cert
petition with the Supreme Court in May 2014.
Status: Cert petition is pending.
Wright v. Corrections Corporation of Ameri-
ca (FCC Rule-making Petition)
Petitioning the Federal Communications Com-
mission (FCC) to regulate interstate prison
telephone calls to ensure fair and reasonable
rates for prisoners and their families.
Status: The FCC published a rule in February
2014 regulating interstate inmate calling service
rates.
Blackman Hinds v. DHS (amicus)
CCR submitted an amicus brief in an appeal
by an immigrant challenging his mandatory
deportation under the 1996 immigration reform
statutes. The amicus brief argues that Con-
gress’s power to regulate immigration is not
enumerated in the text of the U.S. Constitution;
instead, the U.S. Supreme Court has consis-
tently characterized it as a power “inherent in
sovereignty,” created by—and limited by—in-
ternational law. International law norms like
the right to family integrity should inform and
restrict draconian mandatory deportation pro-
cedures. In this case, deportation should not be
allowed without individualized consideration of
hardship and whether the government’s inter-
est in removal outweighs the harm.
Status: The case was argued before a panel of
the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in April
2014.
Immigrant Defense Project et al. v. ICE et al.
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)
and Department of Homeland Security on
behalf of Immigrant Defense Project and the
Hispanic Interest Coalition of Alabama seeking
documents related to the continuing practice
by the Obama Administration of using home
raids as an enforcement tactic to arrest and
detain immigrants.
Status: Federal complaint to be filed in South-
ern District of New York in August 2014.
Detention Watch Network v. ICE et al.
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)
and Department of Homeland Security for
documents related to ICE’s implementation of
the “Detention Bed Quota,” a provision of the
annual appropriations bill that requires funding
and filling 34,000 immigration detention beds
per day and that results in the detention of tens
of thousands of immigrants, even when the
law permits them to be released. Because the
provision is up for renewal in the ongoing Con-
gressional budget debate, information about
the effects of the quota is a crucial advocacy
tool for advocates fighting to end it.
Status: Federal complaint filed in January
2014; motion for preliminary injunction fully
briefed by March 2014. Judge dismissed
preliminary injunction motion without prejudice
and instead established a system of required
monthly submissions by DHS and ICE,
beginning June 2014.
National Day Laborer Organizing Network v.
Department of Homeland Security
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit led
to a landmark ruling, the release of a trove of
more than 500,000 pages of documents and
revelations contained in them regarding the Im-
migration and Customs Enforcement’s “Secure
Communities” (S-Comm) data sharing program.
Policing and Prisons/Immigrant Justice
The government’s 2013 Watchlisting Guidance, which
describes the criteria for placing someone on the No Fly List
and other terrorist watchlists.
Case Index
CCR seeks information related to ICE’s “detention bed
quota” operation, which has resulted in record numbers of
immigrants behind bars.
Immigrant Justice
36
The program established immigration finger-
print checks for all arrestees, even for when
charges are minor and there is no criminal con-
viction. CCR and broad coalitions of activists
and officials across the country have mobilized
against the program, organizing protests
against S-Comm and initiating local legislation
to fight the effects of the program.
Status: The case was settled for $1.2 million in
July 2013. In the aftermath, numerous localities,
from Philadelphia to Los Angeles, have refused
to comply with the ICE “holds” that are the
hallmark of the Secure Communities program.
These reforms are the direct result of activism
by organizing groups who used information
gathered through the NDLON litigation to
spearhead local change.
Turkmen v. Ashcroft
Class action lawsuit seeking to hold former
Attorney General John Ashcroft and other
high-level officials accountable for unlawful
racial profiling, mass detention, and abusive
treatment of South Asian, Arab, and Muslim
non-U.S. citizens after 9/11.
Status: In December 2012 the district court
dismissed plaintiffs’ claims against high-level
defendants, but denied motions to dismiss
by the wardens and other supervisors at the
Metropolitan Detention Center. A cross-appeal
to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals was
argued in May 2014. We are now waiting for a
decision.
Phillips v. Snyder
Challenging the Michigan law that allows the
governor to appoint so-called “emergency
managers” to take control of democratically
elected local governments and/or school
districts. The lawsuit charges Michigan
Governor Rick Snyder and the legislature with
implementing an unconstitutional power grab
that effectively silences and disenfranchises
citizens and ends democratic government in
some of Michigan’s poorest communities and
communities of color.
Status: Case filed in the Eastern District of
Michigan in March 2013. The state moved to
dismiss, and the action was stayed pending
adjudication of the state’s claim that the federal
district court lacked jurisdiction due to Detroit’s
bankruptcy filing. Stay was lifted after amended
complaint was filed excluding Detroit plain-
tiffs, and defendants again moved to dismiss.
The motion to dismiss is fully briefed, but the
defendants have appealed the lifting of the stay
to the Sixth Circuit.
Gulino v. The Board of Education of the
City of New York
Class action lawsuit on behalf of New York City
public school teachers of color who are chal-
lenging discriminatory tests and licensing rules
which stripped them of their permanent teach-
ing licenses, seniority, and in some cases their
tenured teaching positions, resulting in drastic
reductions in salary, benefits and pension.
Many of these teachers were kept in the class-
room in the same positions and course loads,
but on a per diem basis and without benefits or
union protections.
Status: In December 2012, the District Court
held that the City Department of Education
discriminated against minority teachers and im-
posed injunctive relief on the City Department
of Education. The Court of Appeals upheld that
decision in February 2014. In August 2013, the
District Court certified a plaintiff class for dam-
ages. The remedial phase of the case is now
proceeding in the District Court.
Johnson v. Locke
Lawsuit charging that the government’s use of
arrest records in hiring process for well-paid
temporary positions within the U.S. Census
Bureau was racially discriminatory. Applicants
were required to produce documentation for
any past arrest, including minor charges—
such as participation in a demonstration—
and regardless of whether or not the arrest
resulted in conviction or of how long ago it
occurred. Using arrest records as an employ-
ment screening criteria compounds the already
existing injustice of extreme racial disparity in
the criminal legal system in which people of
color are arrested at disproportionately higher
rates. The practice denies these populations
the option to work in these difficult economic
times and further deepens the poverty in their
communities.
Status: Class certification is pending.
Immigrant Justice/Racial Justice
Case Index
Racial Justice
S-Comm is an ICE program that requires state and local law
enforcement to send fingerprints of anyone arrested through
immigration databases.
37
United States and Vulcan Society v.
City of New York
Challenging racially discriminatory hiring
practices of the New York City Fire Department
(FDNY) on behalf of the Vulcan Society, an
association of Black firefighters, and individual
class representatives. New York City has the
least diverse fire department of any major city
in America. Only 7.4% are Black and Latino in
New York City, whereas 57% of Los Angeles’
firefighters, 51% of Philadelphia’s, and 40% of
Boston’s are people of color. The case charged
the FDNY with intentionally discriminating
against minority applicants. In a strongly word-
ed rebuke to the city, the district judge ruled in
favor of CCR and the Vulcan Society in 2009
and 2010 on their claims of discrimination.
Status: After conducting a full trial on what
measures would be required to remedy this
persistent pattern of discrimination, the judge
ordered broad injunctive relief, including 10
years of court-supervised monitoring of FDNY
and enhanced recruitment and retention ef-
forts. The judge also separately issued an order
awarding eligible class members back pay in an
amount up to $128 million. The city appealed
the judge’s injunctive relief order and January
2010 finding of intentional discrimination to the
U.S Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. In
May 2013, the Second Circuit issued a ruling
upholding almost all of the injunctive relief—in-
cluding the court monitoring—but remanding
the intentional discrimination issue to a differ-
ent district court judge for trial. In April 2014,
a settlement was reached to resolve the claims
process by paying almost 1500 claimants $98
million dollars, and the Vulcan Society settled
the intentional discrimination case with the City
in return for winning enhanced recruitment of
candidates of color, improved appointment pro-
cesses, and the hiring of a new Chief Diversity
and Inclusion Officer and Diversity Advocate to
monitor fairness within the FDNY.
Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Otter (amicus)
CCR filed an amicus brief urging a federal court
to strike down Idaho’s Ag-Gag law as a violation
of the First Amendment. The law unjustly crimi-
nalizes undercover investigations and whistle-
blowing inside animal agricultural facilities.
Status: Amicus brief filed May 2014. We expect
a ruling soon.
Blum v. Holder
Federal lawsuit challenging the Animal
Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA) as an un-
constitutional infringement on free speech.
The plaintiffs are five long-time animal rights
activists whose advocacy work has been chilled
due to fear of being prosecuted as terrorists
under the AETA. One of the plaintiffs has al-
ready been prosecuted for free speech activity
around hosting a website that reported on and
supported lawful and unlawful protests to shut
down Huntingdon Life Sciences.
Status: In March of 2014, the First Circuit Court
of Appeals affirmed the district court’s dis-
missal. A petition for rehearing was denied in
May 2014.
Davis v. Cox
Defending Olympia Food Co-op Board Mem-
bers against lawsuit brought by five of 22,000
members in response to boycott of Israeli goods.
Status: In April 2014, the Washington State
Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s
dismissal of the case under the Anti-SLAPP
(Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation)
statute and its award of fees and $160,000 in
damages, as well as upheld the statute’s consti-
tutionality. Plaintiffs’ petition to the Washington
State Supreme Court for review is pending.
People v. Sayeed, et al.—Irvine 11 (amicus)
CCR and Jewish Voice for Peace filed an amicus
brief in support of the appeal to overturn the
convictions of the “Irvine 11”—students who
Racial Justice/Defending Dissent and Activism
Case Index
CCR, the Vulcan Society and co-counsel from Levy Ratner at
a press conference announcing the settlement of our chal-
lenge to the FDNY’s racially discriminatory hiring practices.
Long-time animal rights activists and plaintiffs in CCR’s
lawsuit challenging the AETA as a violation of the First
Amendment.
Defending Dissent
and Activism
38
were criminally prosecuted for peacefully pro-
testing a speech by Israeli Ambassador to the
U.S. Michael Oren in 2010.
Status: The trial court’s judgment convicting
the students for their protest was affirmed in
February 2014, and the Court of Appeal denied
defendants’ motion to transfer the case in May
2014.
Sexual Minorities Uganda v. Lively
Suit brought under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS)
by Sexual Minorities Uganda (SMUG), an um-
brella LGBTI advocacy organization in Uganda,
against Scott Lively, an anti-gay extremist
pastor based in Massachusetts, for his direct
role in an ongoing conspiracy to deprive
LGBTI individuals of their fundamental human
rights—including freedoms of speech and
association and from arbitrary detention and
torture based on their sexual orientation and/
or gender identity. In August 2013, the Court
denied the Defendant’s motion to dismiss and,
in a landmark opinion, ruled that persecution
on the basis of sexual orientation and gender
identity is a crime against humanity and that
the fundamental human rights of LGBTI people
are protected under international law. Subse-
quently, in February 2014, Ugandan President
Yoweri Museveni signed the notorious Anti-
Homosexuality Bill into law. Lively played a key
role in the development of that law and also
in moving forward anti-speech and advocacy
laws in Eastern Europe and elsewhere. CCR will
continue the fight to hold Lively accountable in
a U.S. court on behalf of SMUG.
Status: The case is progressing and has moved
into the discovery phase.
Demanding Vatican Accountability for Rape,
Sexual Violence and Torture
CCR is working with the Survivors Network of
those Abused by Priests (SNAP) to hold the
Vatican and its officials accountable in inter-
national human rights bodies for policies and
practices that enable widespread rape and
sexual violence by Catholic clergy. In February
2013, CCR and SNAP filed a groundbreaking
report with the United Nations Committee on
the Rights of the Child and participated in the
Committee’s review of the Vatican in January
2014 in Geneva. In April 2014, CCR and SNAP
filed a report with the United Nations Com-
mittee Against Torture, and participated in
the Committee’s review of the Vatican in May
2014. These UN Committees’ inquiries repre-
sent the first time any international body has
questioned the Vatican on these issues.
Status: In February 2014, the UN Committee on
the Rights of the Child issued its report, which
found that the Vatican consistently placed the
reputation of the Church ahead of the best
interests of children, and that the Vatican’s poli-
cies and practices had led to the continuation
of sexual violence against children around the
globe. In May 2014, the UN Committee Against
Torture emphasized that rape and sexual vio-
lence are forms of torture and cruel, inhuman
and degrading treatment, under international
law and expressed concern that the Vatican had
failed to meet its obligations to prevent, punish
and remedy acts of torture in this regard.
Defending Dissent and Activism/Gender Justice
Case Index
Gender Justice
CCR, SMUG clients and allies packed the courthouse in
Springfield, MA, at oral arguments in Scott Lively’s motion to
dismiss our case against him.
SNAP representatives in front of the United Nations in
Geneva, where CCR and SNAP held the Vatican accountable
for widespread sexual violence.
Cuba Travel Project
National Lawyers Guild attorney and longtime CCR partner Art Heitzer
continues to help us respond to inquiries about laws surrounding travel
to Cuba.
Death Penalty Mission
On October 10, 2013, the World Day Against the Death Penalty, CCR
and the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) released
the Death Penalty Mission Report following a fact-finding mission in
California and Louisiana. Through interviews with death row prison-
ers, exonorees, family members, advocates, legal counsel, NGOs, and
documentary review, the Mission conducted a human rights assessment
of current issues arising from or related to the use of the death pen-
alty in the U.S. The Mission found that the death penalty as currently
practiced in California and Louisiana is arbitrary and discriminatory, and
that conditions on death row constitute torture and cruel, inhuman, and
degrading treatment. With the report’s release, CCR and FIDH called
for an immediate moratorium on executions as well as procedural and
prison reforms, including the end to the use of solitary confinement for
those on death row, and set forth specific findings and recommenda-
tions to bring the U.S. in line with its human rights obligations. The
report is available online: www.CCRjustice.org/death-penalty.
GTMO Hunger Strike Advocacy
In February 2013, in response to degrading searches of the men’s
Qu’rans and growing desperation from over 11 years of indefinite
detention without charge, the majority of men at Guantánamo began a
hunger strike that grew into the largest detainee protest at the prison.
Eventually over 100 prisoners joined the hunger strike and as many as
40 were forcibly fed in restraint chairs, a practice widely condemned by
the medical and international community as inhumane and torturous.
Since the men were further isolated from each other and the outside
world, it was all the more critical that CCR make frequent trips to Guan-
tánamo to hear directly from them about the conditions at the prison
and their health, and bring that information to the public. CCR and
habeas counsel wrote letters to the prison administration and Depart-
ment of Defense detailing our concern over the unfolding crisis; signed
on to coalition letters calling on President Obama to address his failure
to close the prison and to resume transfers; worked extensively with the
media; and coordinated rallies and actions with grassroots groups and
supporters. Our clients were central to these different forms of outreach
and engagement.
HOOD
HOOD is a human rights organization based in Yemen, which offers
legal assistance to victims of torture and illegal detention. It has been
active since Guantánamo opened, and for over a decade, HOOD has
organized events, conferences, and protests on the ground in Yemen
that help bring attention to the injustice of the prison and its effect
on communities there. As a respected and trusted group in Yemen, it
was through our partnership with HOOD that CCR and other Yemeni
counsel were able to establish relationships with our clients’ families
and, ultimately, gain access to our clients in the prison. Further, HOOD
has helped connect CCR with Yemeni officials and has assisted CCR at-
torneys with work on the ground. For example, in a recent trip to Yemen
to film a documentary, HOOD facilitated most of our travel, advised us
on various aspects of filming logistics, and travelled with the CCR legal
team to meet our client’s family for the first time.
HOOD has also been an invaluable partner in our targeted killings work.
In 2010, they connected us with our client Nasser Al-Aulaqi in Al-Aulaqi
v. Obama. It was in large part because of HOOD’s recommendation,
and specifically that of Mohammed Allawo, that Dr. Al-Aulaqi ultimately
decided to retain CCR as counsel. We continued to collaborate with
HOOD, including in 2013, when we submitted joint testimony on vic-
tims of targeted killings in Yemen to Congress, which was based on their
on-the-ground research.
CCR Joint Projects
HOOD was an invaluable partner during CCR’s trip to Yemen to film our documentary about
our Guantánamo client, Fahd Ghazy, and his family.
39
Human Rights Defenders Project
Human rights defenders stand up and speak out to defend the rights of
everyone. Unfortunately, human rights defenders can be targeted by
those who perceive defenders’ activities as threatening their interests.
CCR, in partnership with the Center for Reproductive Rights, launched
a project in December 2012 to promote the human rights defender
framework found in international human rights documents among our
domestic allies, community organizers and grassroots human rights
organizations. The project includes a new website, video and a toolkit
comprised of educational materials and a guide for U.S. organizations to
use international or regional human rights mechanisms to protect their
rights. Learn more about the project at: www.DefendingRights.org
No Separate Justice Campaign
CCR has partnered with the No Separate Justice Campaign to shed light
on and end a pattern of human rights and civil liberties abuses in federal
terrorism cases in the U.S. criminal justice system. In early 2014, CCR
co-sponsored the Campaign’s inaugural launch event and has remained
involved in organizing around the Campaign’s core issues: inhumane
conditions of confinement; fair trial and due process violations; First
Amendment concerns and Material Support charges; and unlawful
surveillance and entrapment. Since February, the Campaign has held
vigils on the first Monday of every month in front of the Metropolitan
Correctional Center (MCC) in Manhattan in order to bring attention to
the inhumane conditions for terrorism suspects and others held at MCC
and to highlight various cases (including those of CCR clients Fahad
Hashmi and Yassin Aref) where defendants’ fundamental rights have
been violated, both in courtrooms and prisons across the U.S. Through
ongoing public education events, media work, research, and advocacy,
the Campaign, CCR and allies are growing the movement to challenge
the rights erosions happening on the domestic side of the U.S.’ “War
on Terror.”
Justice for Human Rights Defenders Killed or Injured by Israel
The presence of human rights defenders is critical in areas experiencing
widespread human rights violations, such as the Occupied Palestinian
Territory. Attacks on human rights defenders are a serious violation of
international law. The U.S. has repeatedly failed to take meaningful mea-
sures to demand accountability for the killing or injury of U.S. human
rights defenders by Israel, despite its responsibility to ensure protection
of its citizens. In response, in addition to its legal work in cases such as
the Gaza Freedom Flotilla FOIA, CCR has long partnered with organi-
zations such as the U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, the
Rachel Corrie Foundation and our Gaza-based partner the Palestinian
Center for Human Rights to demand the U.S. pursues accountability
instead of hindering it. In 2013, for example, CCR hosted a conference
panel entitled Justice for Human Rights Defenders featuring CCR At-
torney Maria LaHood and Cindy and Craig Corrie, the parents of Rachel
Corrie who was killed by the Israeli military in Rafah, Gaza in 2003 and
who CCR represented in Corrie v. Caterpillar. CCR has also produced
factsheets, blogs, and organizational statements—including those
signed by both Israeli and Palestinian human rights organizations—and
engaged our supporters to call attention to the impunity.
Palestine Solidarity Legal Support
CCR, in partnership with Palestine Solidarity Legal Support (PSLS), and
in collaboration with the National Lawyers Guild and others, is protect-
ing and advancing the constitutional rights of Palestinian rights activists
in the U.S. CCR has long been committed to fighting for Israeli account-
ability for international law violations, and as the Palestine solidarity
movement in the U.S. has grown, so have attempts to silence, discredit,
and punish students and activists who are critical of Israeli policies.
CCR cooperating attorneys from PSLS—Dima Khalidi, Liz Jackson, and
Radhika Sainath—are tracking incidents of intimidation of Palestinian
rights activists and providing legal advice, representation or referrals,
resources and advocacy support to activists. This repression against stu-
dents and activists has included administrative complaints, civil lawsuits,
school disciplinary proceedings, harassment, government surveillance
and even criminal prosecutions for non-violent protest. This past year,
we successfully worked with allies to advocate for students whose activ-
ism was scrutinized in Department of Education Office of Civil Rights
Title VI investigations and to mobilize to defeat numerous legislative
CCR Joint Projects
In January, CCR and partners launched the No Separate Justice Campaign with a panel
discussion on the case of CCR client Fahad Hashmi.
40
threats to take away state funding from universities that fund mem-
bership or activities in faculty associations boycotting Israel. For more
information about PSLS, please visit: palestinelegalsupport.org.
Communities United For Police Reform
Communities United for Police Reform, of which CCR is a founding
member and steering committee member, is a campaign of more than
60 organizations working to end discriminatory policing practices. Over
the nearly 10-week Floyd v. City of New York trial, CPR and its mem-
bership packed the court and held daily press conferences, rallies and
events to draw public attention to how the communities they represent
were being affected by unconstitutional and racially discriminatory stops
and frisks. This critical organizing and aggressive advocacy behind the
scenes, and in packing the court, was essential in securing the ultimate
victory. See p.11 for more information.
Right to Heal Initiative
CCR joined Iraq Veterans Against the War, the Organization of Women’s
Freedom in Iraq, and the Federation of Workers Councils and Unions
in Iraq to form the Right to Heal Initiative in order to demand that the
full costs of the Iraq war be assessed. Since the project launched in
2013, the coalition has focused on domestic and international advocacy,
including outreach in U.S. Congress, signature gather on the streets of
Iraq and online, media work, and public events. As the sectarian conflict
reached a breaking point in June 2014, CCR helped build an echo
chamber to amplify the messages of our partners in Iraq and Iraq War
veterans critical of further U.S. military intervention. See p.19 for more
information.
Animal Rights/Ag-Gag Laws
CCR has long been at the forefront of defense work on behalf of animal
rights activists targeted by the Green Scare, deepening our relation-
ship with this growing movement and helping to build a coalition that is
now successfully pushing back against this corporate and government
repression. In our most recent litigation efforts, CCR filed an amicus
brief in a federal First Amendment challenge to Idaho’s so-called “ag-
gag” law, which punishes whistleblowing in animal agricultural facilities.
The case was filed on behalf of a coalition of animal activists, journalists,
workers’ rights organizations, environmental groups, and civil liber-
ties defenders, including journalist Will Potter, the animal sanctuary
Farm Sanctuary, and the animal law organization Animal Legal Defense
Fund. CCR Senior Staff Attorney and lead counsel in our challenge to
the federal Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, Rachel Meeropol, was also
a featured speaker on the “Activist Repression” plenary panel at the
National Animal Rights Conference, where she shared the stage with
Potter and AETA plaintiff Sarahjane Blum. CCR’s annual and prominent
presence at the National Animal Rights Conference allows us to not only
broaden our understanding of the animal rights movement’s efforts, but
also to connect with new partners.
On the 11th anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, Iraqi civil society leaders and U.S.
military veterans testified to the lasting impact of the war and called for accountability in the
U.S. government.
CCR legal team and plaintiffs in Blum v. Holder, along with animal rights activists, after
February argument in Boston.
41
42
Partners in Litigation
Al-Aulaqi v. Panetta
• AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION (ACLU)
Jameel Jaffer, Hina Shamsi, Brett Kaufman
• ACLU OF THE NATION’S CAPITAL
Arthur Spitzer
Al-Bihani v. Obama
• HOOD
Al-Hamiri v. Obama
• CLIFFORD CHANCE LLP
Jeff Butler
Al-Majalah Freedom of Information Act
• AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION (ACLU)
Hina Shamsi
Al Qahtani v. Obama
• CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS AT NORTHWESTERN
UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW
Sandra Babcock
• GIBBONS P.C.
Lawrence Lustberg, Joseph A. Pace
• Ramzi Kassem
• Gitanjali Guttierez
Al Shimari v. CACI
• AKEEL & VALENTINE, PLC
Shereef Akeel
• PATTERSON BELKNAP WEBB & TYLER LLP
Robert P. Lobue, Michelle W. Cohen, Sarah Lorr, Peter Nelson,
Jennifer Dixon
• George Brent Mickum
• Mohammed Alomari
• Jeena Shah
• THE GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY
Ralph Steinhardt
• COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL PLLC
Agnieszka M. Fryszman
• CENTER FOR JUSTICE AND ACCOUNTABILITY
Kathleen Roberts
• INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS CLINIC AT HARVARD LAW SCHOOL
Tyler Giannini
• UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA SCHOOL OF LAW
Deena Hurwitz
Al Shimari v. CACI (cont.)
• CENTER FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE AT SETON HALL UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF LAW
Jonathan Hafetz, Rachel Godsil, John Romberg
Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Otter (amicus)
• NEVIN, BENJAMIN, MCKAY & BARTLETT, LLP
Michael Bartlett
Celikgogus v. Rumsfeld/ Allaithi v. Rumsfeld
• ORRICK, HERRINGTON AND SUTCLIFFE LLP
Russell P. Cohen, Howard M. Ullman, Jason Cabot, Bob Rosenfeld
Ameziane v. Obama
• REFUGEE LAW OFFICE
Andrew J. Brouwer
• CORNERSTONE BARRISTERS
Sophie Weller, Jennifer Oscroft
Ameziane v. United States
• CENTER FOR JUSTICE AND INTERNATIONAL LAW (CEJIL)
Francisco Quintana, Charles Abbott
Aref v. Holder
• WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP
Gregory Silbert, Eileen Citron, John Gerba, Andrey Spektor,
Lara Veblen, Robyn Lewis, Daniel Riegel
• PORTLAND LAW COLLECTIVE
Kenneth A. Kreuscher
Ashker v. Brown
• Jules Lobel
• LAW OFFICES OF CHARLES CARBONE
Charles Carbone, Evan Greenberg
• LEGAL SERVICES FOR PRISONERS WITH CHILDREN
Carol Strickman, Azadeh Zohrabi
• CALIFORNIA PRISON FOCUS
Marilyn McMahon
• SIEGEL & YEE
Anne Weills
• WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP
Timothy Saulsbury, Aaron Huang, An Tran, Bambo Obaro,
Matthew Leung, David Sillers, George Gardner
• ELLENBERG & HULL
Gregory Hull
• CHRISTENSEN O’CONNOR JOHNSON KINDNESS PLLC
Carmen Bremer
The Center for Constitutional Rights is grateful to the many cooperating attorneys, co-counsel and private law firms that joined with us in our
legal work this past year. The people named in the list below were a critical part of our efforts to use the law in the struggle for social justice and
human rights. We couldn’t do it without you.
43
Ba Odah v. Obama
• CLIFFORD CHANCE LLP
Jeff Butler
Bigwood v. Department of Defense
• THE GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY
Zachary Wolfe
• CIVIL RIGHTS AND CONSTITUTIONAL LITIGATION CLINIC AT
SETON HALL UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW
Barbara Moses
Blum v. Holder
• BENJAMIN N. CARDOZO SCHOOL OF LAW
Alexander Reinert
• LAW OFFICES OF HOWARD FRIEDMAN, PC
David Milton, Howard Friedman
Bush Torture Indictment (Canada)
• CANADIAN CENTRE FOR INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE (CCIJ)
• Matthew Eisenbrandt
CCR v. United States/CCR v. Lind
• Jonathan Hafetz
• ZUCKERMAN SPAEDER LLP
William J. Murphy, John Connolly
Davis v. Cox
• Barbara Harvey
• Steven Goldberg
• DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP
Devin Smith, Bruce Johnson, Angela
Galloway, Sarah Duran, Ambika Doran
Floyd v. City of New York
• COVINGTON & BURLING LLP
Kasey Martini, Eric Hellerman, Gretchen Hoff Varner,
Philip Irwin, Bruce Corey, Theresa Lin
• BELDOCK, LEVINE AND HOFFMAN, LLP
Jonathan Moore, Jenn Rolnick Borchetta
• EMERY CELLI BRINCKERHOFF & ABADY, LLP
Matthew Brinckerhoff
• HISCOCK & BARCLAY LLP
Brian Whiteley
French Investigation into the U.S. Torture Program
• EUROPEAN CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL
AND HUMAN RIGHTS (ECCHR)
Wolfgang Kaleck, Claire Tixeire, Andreas Schueller
Gulino v. The Board of Education of the City of New York
• DLA PIPER
Joshua Sohn, Anthony Gill
• Joel Hellman
• Steve Seliger
IACHR Precautionary Measures on Guantánamo
• CENTER FOR JUSTICE AND INTERNATIONAL LAW (CEJIL)
Francisco Quintana, Charles Abbott
Haiti – IACHR Precautionary Measures on U.S. Deportations
• UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI INTERNATIONAL LAW CLINIC AND
IMMIGRATION CLINIC
• AMERICANS FOR IMMIGRANT JUSTICE
• ALTERNATIVE CHANCE
• STUART H. SMITH LAW CLINIC AND
CENTER FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE OF LOYOLA UNIVERSITY NEW
ORLEANS COLLEGE OF LAW
Hassan v. City of New York
• FLORIO, PERRUCCI, STEINHARDT & FADER, LLC
Ravinder S. Bhalla
• MUSLIM ADVOCATES
Glenn Katon, Farhana Khera, Adil Haq, Naheed Qureshi
• GIBBONS, P.C.
Lawrence Lustberg, Portia Pedro, Joseph Pace, Jonathan Manes
CCR’s successful challenge to stop-and-frisk in Floyd v. City of New York was the
focus of a recent Jeopardy answer.
44
Hicks v. United States
• NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW
Joseph Margulies
• OFFICE OF THE CHIEF DEFENSE COUNSEL
Samuel Morison, Major Justin Swick (USAF)
• Stephen Kenny
Johnson v. Locke
• OUTTEN & GOLDEN LLP
Adam T. Klein, Justin M. Swartz, Lewis M. Steel, Ossai Miazad,
Amber C. Trzinski, Sally J. Abrahamson
• LAWYERS COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS UNDER LAW
Ray P. McClain, Jane Dolkart
• COMMUNITY SERVICE SOCIETY
Judith Whiting, Paul Keefe
• INDIAN LAW RESOURCE CENTER
Robert T. Coulter
• COMMUNITY LEGAL SERVICES, INC.
Sharon Dietrich
• PUBLIC CITIZEN LITIGATION GROUP
Michael T. Kirkpatrick
• LATINOJUSTICE PRLDEF
Jackson Chin
• Samuel R. Miller
Khan v. Obama
• JENNER & BLOCK LLP
Katya Jestin, Natalie Orpett, Prashant
Yerramalli
Kiyemba v. Obama
• BINGHAM MCCUTCHEN LLP
Sabin Willett, Susan Baker Manning
• KRAMER LEVIN NAFTALIS & FRANKEL LLP
Eric A. Tirschwell
• BAKER & MCKENZIE LLP
George Clarke
• REPRIEVE
Clive Stafford Smith, Cori Crider
• Seema Saifee
• Elizabeth P. Gilson
Mamani v. Sánchez de Lozada and Sánchez Berzaín
• Beth Stephens
• Judith Chomsky
• KAIRYS, RUDOVSKY, MESSING & FEINBERG, LLP
David Rudovsky
• SCHONBRUN, DESIMONE, SEPLOW, HARRIS & HOFFMAN LLP
Paul Hoffman
• AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER & FELD LLP
Steven Schulman, Michael Small, Jeremy Bollinger, Jonathan Slowik
• INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS CLINIC AT HARVARD LAW SCHOOL
Susan Farbstein, Thomas Becker, Tyler Giannini
• KURZBAN, KURZBAN, WEINGER & TETZOLI
Ira Kurzban, Geoffrey Hoffman
Mamilla Cemetery Human Rights Campaign
• Dima Khalidi
National Day Laborer Organizing Network v. Department of Homeland
Security
• BENJAMIN N. CARDOZO SCHOOL OF LAW IMMIGRATION JUSTICE
CLINIC
Peter Markowitz, Sonia Lin, Lindsay Nash
• MAYER BROWN LLP
Anthony Diana, Therese Craparo, Lisa Plush, Jeremy Schildcrout,
Gretta Walters, Bridget Kessler
Palestine Solidarity Legal Support
• Dima Khalidi
• Liz Jackson
• Radhika Sainath
Patel v. Arpaio
• ROBBINS & CURTIN, PLLC
Joel Robbins
• CIVIL RIGHTS AND CONSTITUTIONAL LITIGATION CLINIC AT SETON
HALL UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW
Barbara Moses
People v. Sayeed, et al. – Irvine 11 (amicus)
• Dima Khalidi
• Liz Jackson
Partners in Litigation
45
Phillips v. Snyder
• SUGAR LAW CENTER
John Philo, Tova Perlmutter, Anthony Paris, Stephanie Vaught
• GOODMAN, HURWITZ, P.C.
Bill Goodman, Julie Hurwitz
• THE SANDERS LAW FIRM
Herbert Sanders
• MILLER COHEN PLC
Keith Flynn
• CONSTITUTIONAL LITIGATION ASSOCIATES
Cynthia Heenan & Alec Gibbs
Sexual Minorities Uganda v. Lively
• LAW OFFICES OF SASSON TURNBULL RYAN AND HOOSE
Luke Ryan
• Jeena Shah
• DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP
Mark Sullivan, Josh Colangelo-Bryan, Gina Spiegelman,
Vikram Kumar, Scott Skinner-Thompson
Spanish Investigation into the U.S. Torture Program
• EUROPEAN CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL AND HUMAN RIGHTS
(ECCHR)
Wolfgang Kaleck, Claire Tixeire, Andreas Schueller
• BOYE-ELBAL Y ASOCIADOS
Gonzalo Boye
Tanvir v. Holder
• CREATING LAW ENFORCEMENT ACCOUNTABILITY AND
RESPONSIBILITY OF CUNY SCHOOL OF LAW
Ramzi Kassem, Diala Shamas
• DEBEVOISE & PLIMPTON LLP
Jennifer R. Cowan, Bob Shwartz, Rushmi Bhaskaran,
Erica M. Davila, Christopher S. Ford, Erol Gulay, Rebecca Hekman,
Brandon H. Johnson
• Jeena Shah
Turkmen v. Ashcroft
• COVINGTON & BURLING LLP
Jennifer Robbins, Nancy Kestenbaum, Joanne Sum-Ping
• Michael Winger
• NATIONAL IMMIGRATION PROJECT OF NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD
Trina Realmuto
• AMERICAN IMMIGRATION COUNCIL
Mary Kenney
United States and Vulcan Society v. City of New York
• LEVY RATNER, P.C.
Richard Levy, Dana Lossia, Alexander Rabb, Robert Stroup
• SCOTT & SCOTT LLP
Judy Scolnick
United States v. Khan
• JENNER & BLOCK LLP
Katya Jestin, Natalie Orpett, Prashant Yerramalli
• OFFICE OF THE CHIEF DEFENSE COUNSEL, MILITARY COMMISSIONS
LTC Jon Jackson
United States v. Mehanna (amicus)
• OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY MORITZ COLLEGE OF LAW
Amna Akbar
Wright v. Corrections Corporation of America
• FLETCHER, HEALD & HILDRETH, PLC
Lee G. Petro
• WASHINGTON LAWYERS’ COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS AND
URBAN AFFAIRS
Phil Fornaci, Deborah Golden, Stacey Litner
46
Anonymous
Ethel G. Ackley
Salah and Catherine Al-Askari
Elizabeth Alexander
Vicki A. Alexander
Evelyn Alloy
Thomas E. and Donna Ambrogi
Barbra Apfelbaum
Carol Ascher
Ruth Bardach
Philip Bereano
Gene C. Bernardi
Harvey Blend
David M. Block
Belinda Lawrence Breese
Frederick and Betty Briehl
Mary Carr
Margaret R. de Rivera
Theresa Del Pozzo
Marial Delo
Jeffrey Dickemann
George and Minna Doskow
Carol F. Drisko
Wendy J. Dwyer
Margaret L. Eberbach
Donald and Martha Farley
Carl H. Feldman
George and Mary Ferger
Curt J. Firestone
Solomon Fisher
Cecily Fox
Michele S. Garden and
Lawrence Pruski
Mary J. Geissman
Nona Glazer
Edward E. Goldman and Judith Riven
Peter Hanauer
Ellen and Ellis Harris
Chandra Hauptman
Marjorie Heins
Caitlin Kelly Henry
Martin and Mildred Hird
Timothy A. Holmes
Sumi Hoshiko
Martin and Carolyn Karcher
Barbara Karwhite
Julie Kay
Richard Aronson and
Joyce Kirschner
Elizabeth S. Landis
Susan Lee
Joan Lewis
Donald Lipmanson
Zella Luria
Ric MacDowell
Grant Marcus
Norman Masonson
Priscilla J. McMillan
Eva K. Millette Coombs
Joseph Morton
Eva S. Moseley
James Odling
Severo M. Ornstein and Laura Gould
Edward H. Page
Lovel P. Perkins
Rachel Porter
Jeanne Audrey Powers
Dolores M. Priem
Ann E. Reinhart
David G. Rich
Pamela A. Rogers
Marie Henderson Rothman
Jeremy Rye
Patricia R. Sax
Michael A. Schlosser
Ann Shapiro
Antonia Lhamo Shouse Salpeter
Robert M. Siegel
Linda K. Sleffel
Rosalie K. Stahl
Margot Steigman
Barbara Stewart
Mary B. Strauss
Nancy and Bill Strong
Clio Tarazi
Glen C. Thamert
Mari Vlastos
Florence Wagner
Diana Dunn Walker
Peter Weiss
Henry Werner
Barbara West
Ginia Davis Wexler
John H. Wilson
Ellen Yaroshefsky
Emerald Young
Our planned giving program forms the bedrock of our efforts to build an endowment for CCR and to create an institutional legacy dedicated to
upholding the hard-won victories of your lifetime and protecting them from future attacks. By becoming a member of the Thelma Newman Society,
you will join others committed to ensuring that CCR will be there to fight into the next generation. Please contact us if you have any questions about
making a bequest, endowment, gift annuity, or other form of estate gift, or to let us know that you have included CCR in your estate plan.
Carol Drisko
At 84, Carol Drisko is unstoppable. Since retiring from her
job as a children’s newspaper editor, she’s been involved
fulltime with progressive activism—she can often be found
at CCR’s public education events. Outside of politics, she
enjoys time with friends, wine tasting, the opera and camping
in the Adirondacks. Carol learned about CCR in the 1990s
when she noticed how CCR worked on every issue she cared
about. Today, CCR’s work challenging torture, drones, gov-
ernment surveillance and racial discrimination in the FDNY
are of most importance to her.
“The issues that CCR attends to parallel those that have been on my agenda from early on in my life.
Activities I took part in the 50s onward awakened my hopes for social justice and a fair society, that
have turned out to be a continuing struggle never quite won. That’s why CCR is a beneficiary in my
will and trust, so I can ensure that the fight for justice continues as long as it is necessary.”
Thelma Newman Spotlight
Thelma Newman Society
Thelma Newman Planned Giving Society
Carol with CCR staff member Sara Beinert.
47
$250,000 and above
Anonymous
The Atlantic Philanthropies (USA)
Bertha Foundation
Fidelity Charitable Gift Fund
Mayer Brown LLP
Open Society Foundations
$100,000 to $249,999
Anonymous
Kurz Family Foundation
Credo Mobile
The CS Fund/Warsh-Mott Legacy
The Ford Foundation
The Kaphan Foundation
Shel Kaphan
The Tides Foundation
Wallace Action Fund
Randall and Janet Wallace
John H. Wilson
$50,000-$99,999
Anonymous
The 1848 Foundation
David Rockefeller Fund
Leonard C. Goodman
John and Kathryn Greenberg
Horizons Foundation
Hubert and Rachelle Marshall
Richard C. Mehl
†
and Paula Allred
Katherine Moore
The New York Community Trust
Samuel Rubin Foundation
Schwab Charitable Fund
The Vital Projects Fund, Inc.
The Wallace Global Fund
Victoria R. Ward
†
deceased
CCR Donors
In 2005, The Atlantic Philanthropies selected CCR as a legacy organization, and for the 10 years
since, CCR has been proud to be a grantee.
Atlantic has supported the Center with both generous capacity-building support, as well as pro-
grammatic support for our longstanding challenges to the post-9/11 national security state. The
Atlantic Philanthropies has been a true partner in our work: challenging us in 2005 to grow the
Center to meet the extraordinary demands of our post-9/11 work (CCR’s staff has doubled in size
since 2005, and our budget has nearly tripled); and preparing us for their eventual closure in 2016
by requiring CCR to match their support in order to ensure there would be funders to replace them.
Atlantic understood that unless an organization is built on a stable foundation, the programmatic
work would suffer. With their capacity-building grants, The Atlantic Philanthropies supported
necessary, if often unglamorous, items, such as strategic planning, server upgrades, phone systems,
and website redesigns; knowing that without this type of support, these essential items would
either go unfulfilled or paid for with programmatic funds—either option hindering our effective-
ness. By challenging CCR to match their funding, they have positioned the Center for a life without
Atlantic, which will close its doors in 2016 after spending out its remaining funds.
Beyond the capacity support, Atlantic was also an early and ardent supporter of CCR’s challenges to
civil liberties and other human rights abuses that resulted from the so-called “Global War on Terror.”
With their support, The Atlantic Philanthropies encouraged other foundations and donors to come
to the table. Atlantic is bookending their decade of support for CCR with a second capacity-building
grant aimed at helping us increase funding and broaden awareness for the breadth of our work—
including racial justice and international human rights—beyond our well established role as a leader
in the post-9/11 field. Atlantic’s funding truly revolutionized the way the Center works. It is not
hyperbole to say that without The Atlantic Philanthropies, CCR would not be the organization it is
today. While Atlantic may be closing its doors soon, in keeping with their founder, Chuck Feeney’s
“Giving While Living” approach, CCR is honored to have been selected to be one of the last grant-
ees that they not only strengthened, but left better than they found us.
“Human rights problems exist everywhere. As a result, we believe that
our most important legacy is a sustainable set of organizations with the
proven ability to protect and advance rights.”
– The Atlantic Philanthropies
48
$25,000-49,999
Anonymous
Laurie Arbeiter and
Jennifer Hobbs
The Common Counsel
Foundation
The Firedoll Foundation
Katherine Franke
Robert A. Friedman and
Anita Davidson
Sherry and Leo Frumkin
The Funding Exchange
The Herb Block Foundation
Neil A. Holtzman
Lorraine Honig
The Jewish Communal Fund
The JKW Foundation
Herbert Kurz
The Libra Foundation
Nancy Meyer and Marc Weiss
The Normandie Foundation
Domitila Barrios de Chungara Fund
of the Silicon Valley
Community Foundation
Dennis A. Rosenblitt and
Arlene M. Pitman
The Scherman Foundation
Silicon Valley Community
Foundation
Jean Stein
$10,000-$24,999
Anonymous
The Alfred and Jane Ross
Foundation
Franz and Marcia Allina
The Altschul Foundation
The Angelina Fund
Eric and Cindy Arbanovella
Bert
†
and Barbara Aubrey
The Baldwin Family Fund for Peace
and Justice
Frederick and Jutta Benenson
Ara and Linda Bernardi
The Blue Oak Foundation
Elizabeth A. Castelli
craigslist Charitable Fund
David Kimmel Foundation
Mary Pat Davis
The Epstein Teicher
Philanthropies
Lois Blum Feinblatt
Roma B. Foldy
†
The Frances and Benjamin
Benenson Foundation
The Grodzins Fund
Marjorie Heins
John B. and Sarah Lloyd Henry
Joan Hollister
Jewish Federation of Cleveland
Julie Kay and Tom Fergus
Luis and Lee Lainer
Lee & Luis Lainer Family
Foundation
The Lehman-Stamm Family Fund
The Lois and Irving Blum
Foundation, Inc.
Holly Myers and Kirk Neely
Severo M. Ornstein and
Laura Gould
Frances R. Posel
Ralph E. Ogden Foundation, Inc.
David Ratner
Emily F. Ratner
The Ratner Family
Alfred and Jane Ross
The Bright Horizons Fund
of the Tides Foundation
The San Francisco Foundation
The Seed Foundation
Shaffer Family
Louis Slesin
Beatrice Stern
Mary B. Strauss
Tony Tabatznik
The Vanguard Charitable
Endowment Program
Whuffie Fund, LLC
Samuel Wiener, Jr.
$5,000-$9,999
Anonymous
American Endowment Foundation
Michael and Shirin Amin
William and Kendall S. Anthony
Joan Antonucci
†
Arkay Foundation
†
deceased
CCR Donors
Bret currently serves as the Executive Director of the Abolitionist Law
Center in Pittsburgh, PA which is a public interest law firm organized
for the purpose of abolishing class- and race-based mass incarceration
in the United States. He has worked with the Human Rights Coalition
since 2007 as an investigator, organizer, and researcher and was the
Isabel and Alger Hiss Racial Justice Fellow at the Center for Constitu-
tional Rights in 2012. He graduated from the University of Pittsburgh
Law School in May 2013 and was recognized as the school’s Distin-
guished Public Interest Scholar.
“My time with CCR in the Ella Baker program enabled me to
develop a deeper set of understandings and relationships with
people committed to cultivating a style of lawyering rooted in
recognition of the need for radical social transformation and the
prioritizing of political struggle in a movement-building context.
In addition to building practical skills, the program aims to further the evolution of a lawyering
methodology that serves the oppressed, challenges state and corporate power, and refuses to
engage in the pragmatic rationalizations of an intolerable social order that typically define the
legal profession.”
Ella Baker Profile
Bret Grote
49
Rita L. and William J. Bender
Kay Berkson and Sidney Hollander
Diane Boehm
Virginia Brody
The Chicago Community
Foundation
The Columbus Foundation
Rosemary R. Corbett and
David Kaiser
DLA Piper, LLP
Rodney and Carole Driver
Shirley Evenitsky
Donald and Martha Farley
Leona Feyer
†
Daniel and Anita Fine
Fowey Light Fund
James B. and Louise Frankel
Gobioff Foundation
Thomas M. and Rainbow Goetzl
Adelaide Gomer
Google Matching Gifts Program
Daniel Greenberg and
Karen Nelson
Richard S. Hobish and
Florence Wiener
Lisa Honig
Jon and Katherine Dart
Charitable Foundation
The Key Foundation
William D. Kirby
Melodee Kornacker
Landau Family Foundation
Helen S.
†
and Robert E. Lane
Eileen and Paul F. LeFort
Leon Lefson
†
Joan Lewis
The Liberty Hill Foundation
Paula and Barry Litt
Ric MacDowell
Maximum Difference Foundation
Rob McConnell and
Maria DeCastro
Microsoft Matching Gifts Program
Maryanne Mott
Network for Good
Peter J. Neufeld and
Adele Bernhard
Barbara Adler Zeluck Fund,
North Star Fund
Richard L. Pearlstone
The Peggy Meyerhoff
Pearlstone Foundation, Inc.
Eve Pell
Jonathan Perlow
Mitzi C. Raas
Roseben Fund
Robert E. Schoen and
Nancy Bernstein
Zachary Schulman
Peter and Elizabeth C. Shepherd
Shirley and Al Evenitsky Fund
for Social Justice
Sidney Stern Memorial Trust
Richard A. Soble
Joshua Sohn
The Spingold Foundation
James Squire
Adam and Jane Stein
The Stewart R. Mott Foundation
Merry Tucker
Wendy Vanden Heuvel
The W. Trust
George Wallerstein
William B. Wiener, Jr.
The William B. Wiener, Jr.
Foundation
Chic Wolk
Workable Alternatives Foundation
$2,500-4,999
Anonymous
Leslie Abbey and Steve Dietz
Eugene Auerbach
†
Margo Baldwin
Charles R. and Linda Brainard
Martin Branning
Belinda Lawrence Breese
James T. Campen and Phyllis Ewen
Castagnola Family Fund, Sante Fe
Community Foundation
John A. Chandler and
Elizabeth V. Tanis
Shulamit Decktor
William L. Donnelly and
Marcia Mason
Jean M. Entine
Greenleaf Avenue Foundation
Susan J. Haas and Keith J. Patti
Dick S. and Loretta Heiser
The John D. and Catherine T.
MacArthur Foundation
Ira G. Kawaller and Joanna Knobler
Charles L. and Anna Kerstein
Marily Kay Knieriemen
William Fleet Lankford
Timothy J. Lee and
Eleanor McBride
Thomas A. Lehrer
Susan E. Manuel
William G. Mascioli
Marcia Mason and
William L. Donnelly
Vincent McGee
Robert H. and Ellen V. Meeropol
Karen Mock
National Philanthropic Trust
Jill W. Nelson and Thomas R. Bidell
Wendy R. Olesker and John Crow
Wayne Outten
Stuart Ozer
Mary R. and Benjamin I. Page
Lovel P. Perkins
Charles Ratner and
Ilana Horowitz-Ratner
James and Susan Ratner
Mark and Nancy Ratner
Ronald and Deborah B. Ratner
Claire Reed
Ann E. Reinhart
Dorothy Rinaldo
Alex J. and Carole Rosenberg
William L. and Sandra L. Rosenfeld
Alice Rothchild
Wallace M. Shawn
Clio Tarazi
Anne Heath Widmark
$1,000-$2,499
Anonymous
A & J Saks Foundation, Inc.
Advantage Performance Group
Hesham R. and
Diane Al-Alusi
Salah and Catherine Al-Askari
Paul J. Allen
Robert and Sarah Alsdorf
Theresa F. Alt and
E. Wayles Browne
Daniel L. Alterman and
Li Wah Lai
Donna Katzin Altschuler and
Alan Altschuler
Nabil M. and Ann S. Amer
Heather Andersen and
Leslie Christian
Harry Anduze Montaño
R. S. Anthony
Barbara Mains and
Alessandro Armento
Janet S. Arnold and
Michael H. Rubin
Sally Arnold and Christine Weir
Judy A. Austermiller and
Warren R. Betty
Radhika Balakrishnan and
David W. Gillcrist
Joseph Baribeau
Bruce E. Barkley and Sonia Baur
50
Harriet Barlow
William Barnickle
Amy Bashiti
Richard Beale
Jay Bear
The Beavertides Foundation
Judith E. Belsky
Douglas J. Bender and
Emma B. Trejo
Matthew A. Berlin and
Simone Liebman
Catherine Bishop and
J. Kenneth Donnelly
Meredith A. and Bill Blau
Linda and Mitchel S. Bollag
Fraser Bonnell
Eve Borenstein and
Candace Falk
Judith T. and Donald S. Broder
Allan and Muriel Brotsky
Jonathan W. Brown and
Brynnen Ford
Michael E. Cahill
John Callas
Steve and Barbara Callas
Ira Carp
Ava H. Cheloff
Jerry and Caroline Cohen
The Community Foundation
of Santa Cruz
The Community Foundation
of Western Mass.
Community Futures Collective
Annemarie Congdon
Conservest
Michael A. Cooper
Mary Ellen Copeland and
Edward M. Anthes
Charles M. Crane and
Wendy Breuer
Lynn-Marie Crider
E. Patrick Curry and
Susan B. Campbell
Susan R. Curtiss and
John M. Gresham
The David and Sylvia
Teitelbaum Fund, Inc.
Emily Deferrari and Mel Packer
Madeline H. deLone and
Robert L. Cohen
Meera and Manoj Deo
Gerald L. Dickinson
Stephanie and Vikas Didwania
James K. Donnell
Alan Donovan
Dorsey & Whitney, LLP
Daniel L. and Lee M. Drake
Paul Durrant
Diane Early and Daniel Gigone
Margaret L. Eberbach
Shiva Eftekhari
Harrison Eiteljorg, II
Robert M. Factor
Rosemary F. Faulkner
Martin R. Feinman
Robert Fertik and Antonia Stolper
Abraham Flaxman
Foundation Source
Eleanor Friedman and
Jonathan Cohen
John Gilmore
Sherna B. and Marvin Gluck
Stephen Gockley and Ellen Posel
Peter J. Gollon
Carlos and Carrington Goodman
Waleed K. and Hannah Gosaynie
Lynn Greiner and John B. Midgley
Stuart J. and Joan B. Gross
Peter Hanauer
Collier M. Hands
Marge Harburg
Bernard Harcourt and Mia Ruyter
Guy M. Harris
Louis R. Hellwig
David Henkel and Cleo Griffith
Martin Henner
Edward S. and Mary W. Herman
Robert and Claire Heron
Michael J. Hirschhorn and
Jimena P. Martinez
John Hoffmeyer and
Janet M. Corpus
Randall D. Holmberg and
Evelyn Yee
Catherine Newman and
Stephen D. Holmes
Timothy A. Holmes
Honeybee Foundation
Embry M. Howell
David Hurwitz
Steven and Miriam Hyman
Zeljko Ivanek
Gail K. Johnson
Kenneth M. Jones and Carol Koury
Wilhelm Joseph, Jr.
William Josephson and
Barbara Haws
Just Give
Eugenia Kalnay
Herschel and Margrit Kaminsky
Martin and Carolyn Karcher
Terry Lynn Karl
Patrice Kaska
Arthur Kennedy
Barbara I. and John I. Kennedy
Jerry Kickenson
Michael Kieschnick
Ashish Kilam
Richard Aronson and
Joyce Kirschner
Joanna Knobler and
Ira G. Kawaller
David A. Korman
Karen Krahulik and Susan Allee
Fayette F. Krause
Edward M. Krishok and
Peggy K. Hong
Mary U. Kruse
Emily Kunreuther
Sabyl Cohen Landrum
Kay Lehman Schlozman
Phyllis B. and John Lehman
Eric L. Lewis
Judith Lichtenberg and
David J. Luban
Philip and Elsa R. Lichtenberg
Jules Lobel and Karen Engro
Leslie Singer Lomas
Gail K. Lopez-Henriquez
M. Brinton Lykes and
Catherine M. Mooney
Lorraine Lyman
Ramsay MacMullen
Annie Makhijani
Evan Mason and Garrard Beeney
Aaron McGrath
The McKenzie River Gathering
Foundation
Juliet A. Melamid
Benjamin Mellman and
Ann Chung
Carrie Menkel-Meadow and
Robert Meadow
Joyce Miller
Gerrish Milliken
Jeanne E. and Franklin E. Mirer
L. David Mirkin
Daphna H. Mitchell
Richard W. and Barbara F. Moore
Morgan Stanley Global
Impact Funding Trust
Judy and Roy Nakadegawa
Nathan Naze
Guy
†
and Tamara Nelson
CCR Donors
51
The New Prospect Foundation
Hans Noll
Isabelle C. Osborne
Norman Oslik and
Madeleine Golde
The Overbrook Foundation
Gloria C. Phares and
Richard Dannay
Hanna F. Pitkin
Tim Plenk and Janet Axelrod
Sandra Polishuk
Nancy R. Posel
The Presbyterian Foundation
Camilo Ramirez
Margaret J. Randall and
Barbara Byers
Albert Ratner
Brian J. Ratner
Vanessa Redgrave
Marcus Rediker and
Wendy Z. Goldman
Joyce L. Richardson
Lawrence and Janet A. Rivkin
Christy Robb
Tim Robbins
John H. Rodgers
George S. Rothbart and
Ingrid Scheib-Rothbart
Judith Rothchild
Albert Ruben
Dean Graham Ruby
Joseph L. Ruby
Gladys B. and Richard Rustay
Arnold S. Saks
Marc Sapir and Sheila Thorne
Edmund Sassoon
Jack Sawyer
John M. Scanlan
Julie Schecter
Gordon Schiff and Mardge Cohen
Daniel Schlozman
William J. and
Katherine L. Schrenk
Edwin M. Schur and
Joan Brodsky Schur
Steven Schwartz
Steve Seltzer
Daniel Shapiro
Susan L. Sheinfeld
Albert D. Shuldiner and
Emily B. Myers
Neville Roy Singham
Paul Slagle
Seymour Smidt
Michelle D. Smith
Morton Sobell and
Nancy Gruber
Romaine Gustava Solbert
Lawrence Spears
Ann W. Speckman
Emily A. Spieler and
Gregory Wagner
Nancy Stearns
Julia Steinberger
Amanda J. Stent
Alan and Victoria Sussman
The T. Rowe Price Program
for Charitable Giving
Richard Teitelbaum
The Arthur & Henrietta A.
Sorin Charitable Trust
Michael C. Thielmann
Sue Lee K. Troutman
Hazel Tulecke and
William B. Houston
Barbara C. and Franklin M. Turner
James S. Tyre
Anne Venhuizen and James King
Stephen Waite
James E. Wallace
Stephen Warren
Nancy Wasserman
Barbara S. Webster
Sabin and Marta Willett
Russell Williams
David Wilson
Lincoln and Wilma C. Wolfenstein
Ellen Yaroshefsky
Ann Yasuhara
Michael D. Yokell
Sandra A. Zagarell
Michael J. and Naomi P. Zigmond
Michael F. Zweig and
Kathy Chamberlain
Doris and Donald Shaffer were longtime members of
the CCR community; as donors and volunteers they
gave generously of their time and resources. Sadly we
lost both over the last few years, but their sons Na-
than, David and Robert continued the family tradition
of supporting CCR by establishing the Doris and Don
Shaffer Memorial Internship and making a generous
gift to CCR. The five-year pledge funds the fellowship
stipend, supports CCR programmatic work, and fulfills
their parents’ wish that there continue to be “Shaffers”
in the CCR community.
The Shaffer intern will participate in the Center’s Ella Baker Program, part of our mission to train the
next generation of movement lawyers in partnership with the Bertha Justice Institute. Interns receive
hands-on training working closely with CCR attorneys, clients and allies. This year’s intern was Leena
Odeh (see p.52).
The Center is honored to have this opportunity to carry on the Shaffers’ tradition of supporting social
justice and progressive activism and is grateful to their sons for making support of CCR a family affair.
Doris and Don Shaffer Memorial Internship
52
$500-$999
Anonymous
David J. Aalderks
Robert and Miriam Abramovitz
Merritt and Barbara Abrash
Katherine Acey
Emily P. and
Benjamin M. Achtenberg
Andrew Ackerman
Margaret T. and Frank T. Adams
Adobe Systems Incorporated
Cathy Albisa and Waldo Cubero
Michael Altman and Barbara Ogur
Melinda Delashmutt and
Francisco Altschul
Thomas E. and Donna Ambrogi
Grace Ambrose
Mark Amsterdam
M.L. Armstrong
Gail Austin
Bo Barker
James A. Becker
Carola and Eliza Beeney
Sara E. Beinert
James M. Bergin and
Ellen P. Lukens
Rick Best and
Susan Douglas Taylor
Judy Bierbaum
George and Eleanor Bollag
The Boston Foundation
Eileen Brenner
Richard Brodsky
David and Patty Broiles
Harold Broker
Edward J. and Marion D. Bronson
Robert E. L. and
Sylvie Maria Brown
BTS USA, Inc.
Carol Buell and
Olivia Hicks
Judith Butler
Calvert Social Investment
Foundation
Phil M. and Virginia Campbell
Florence Chan
Timothy Coffey
Jeffrey D. and Lilia Cohen
Douglas Cole
Jesse Coleman
The Colyton Foundation
The Community Foundation
David B. Cone and Kellie Stoddart
Janet M. Conn
Craig R. and Cynthia B. Corrie
Clare M. Coss and
Blanche Wiesen Cook
Jennifer R. Cowan and
Dan M. Jacob
Brenda Cravens
John M. Crew
Susan Crile
David P. Dean and
Catherine M. Bergmann
Thomas E. DeCoursey
Larry Denenberg
Jeron E. and Marjorie B. Donalds
David Dow
Alan and Susan S. Dranitzke
Barry N. and Ismartilah
Drummond
Robert Dubrow and
Melinda A. Tuhus
Steven Elkinton
Ray H. and Marilyn Elling
Peter and Stella Elliston
Elsberg Family Foundation
Wallace B. and Heike Eubanks
Lenore Feigenbaum and
Simon J. Klein
Sydney and Eric Fisher
Erwin Flaxman
Kobie Flowers
Kathleen Fones
Julian N. Gaa and
Ruth Y. Gaa-Spano
Kit Gage and Steven J. Metalitz
Cynthia Gallagher and
Shaun Manchand
Ronald E. and Jacqueline Garrett
Margaret A. Geddes
Sheila Geist
Paula Gellman
Daniel Gillmor
Frederick S. Golan and
Anne M. Kenney
Kurt and Sorel Gottfried
Allen H. Greenleaf
Ruthe S. and Arnold Grubin
Anne Guloyan
Lloyd H. and Mary Ellen Guptill
Hans C. and Linda Haacke
Dwight Hahn
David Halperin
Beth Harris
Emily Hauptmann
Anthony Heilbut
Jenny Heinz
Peter Niels Heller
Brian and Rose Batchelor Henley
CCR Donors
Leena is a founding member of Ella’s Daughters, a network of artists,
scholars and writers working in the tradition of civil rights activist Ella
Baker. Her family is based in Chicago and she currently studies at
Northeastern University of Law after graduating from Carleton Col-
lege. Leena works as an organizer around Palestinian and other pro-
gressive issues and is a life-long activist for racial justice in Chicago
and internationally. She has worked closely with the Southwest Youth
Collaborative doing leadership and political education with Black,
Latino and Arab youth.
“For me this work is life long and it goes beyond my day job as
this will always be part of my life and who I am…so having the
opportunity to meet like-minded folks who are committed and passionate but also have the same
values deep from within and building that community of trust with them, it’s exciting.”
Ella Baker Profile
Leena Odeh
53
Joseph Herron and
Patricia Baird
J. Michael Hershey and Jo Didner
Virginia S. Hildebrand and
Jan Neffke
Francine S. and Benjamin R. Hiller
Zach Hochstadt and Sadie Honey
Stephen J. Hrinya
Kevin M. Hunt and
Margaret Downing
Allen Hunter
Institute For Women’s
Policy Research
Abdeen M. Jabara
and Holly Maguigan
Chung-Ja Jadwat
Brigitte Jaensch
Kevin and Adrienne James
Jewish Community Federation
Henry S. Kahn and
Mary Gillmor-Kahn
Donald D. and Margaret A. Kioseff
Joanne Kliejunas and
Irving Lubliner
Kornblith and Lasser Family
John W. and Claudia Lamperti
Joseph Landau and
Joseph Fitzgerald
Nancy Lawton
Edward Leinartas
Judy Lerner
Joe Lervold
George K. and Ann C. Levinger
Richard A. Levy and Jane R.
Hirschmann
David R. Lewis
LinkedIn Matching Gifts Progam
Richard and Rita G. Lipsitz
Jason and Lika Litt
Green Meadow Fund of the
Maine Community Foundation
Richard Makdisi and
Lindsay Wheeler
Malcolm Cravens Foundation
Elena S. Manitzas
Gerald E. Markowitz and
Andrea Vasquez
Warren E. and Joyce W. Mathews
Priscilla J. McMillan
Barbara J. Meislin
Beth and David P. Meshke
Middle Road Foundation
Bruce K. and Jane O. Miller
Mark Mitchell
Thomas V. Muller
Robert M. Nelson
Bruce D. Nestor and
Susana De Leon
Thomas B. and Johannah Newman
Louie D. Nikolaidis and Rachel
Horowitz
Michael O. and Robin Nimkoff
Claes Oldenburg
Alicia and Jeremiah P. Ostriker
Edith Oxfeld
John Paar
Arthur Perkins and
Bertille De Baudiniere
Rosalind Petchesky
Nancy Pick
Arlene M. Pitman and
Dennis A. Rosenblitt
Barbara B. Polk
Bruce K. Pollock
Ellyn and James Polshek
Bennett M. Pudlin and
Margaret Ann Judd
Larry Rabinowitz
Susan G. Radner
Julie Ratner
Julia B. Rauch
Gertrude and Daryl D. Reagan
Kay Gunderson Reeves
Paul W. Rehm and
Katja Sander-Rehm
Leila J. Richards
Leonard Rodberg
Paula Rogovin
Jill and Ronald Rohde
Barbara and Oren Root
Eve S. Rosahn
The Rose Foundation for
Communities and the
Environment
Stephen Rose and Christina Cerna
Sarah Rosenwald Varet
Marcie A. Rubel and Michael Rufo
Mark Rudd and Marla Painter
David Rudenstine
Phillip M. Runkel
Lowell Sachnoff
Naomi Sager
Anthony Saidy
Ann Schaetzel
Steven A. and Janet H. Schneider
Claudio L. Schnier
Anne and Bennett M. Schwartz
Renata Manasse Schwebel
Evan D. and Janet Shaad
Anthony Shih
Joel A. and Ethel H. Shufro
Alix Kates Shulman and
Scott York
Robert M. Siegel
Christopher Simpson
Jaswinder Pal Singh and
Silvia Ercolani
Dorothy Slater-Brown
Daniel Sleator
Linda Sleffel
Steve Smaha
Carl and Jane Smith
Cherida Collins Smith
Michael Steven Smith and
Debby Smith
Stephen Samuel Smith
Erwin P. and Pearl F. Staller
Ben R. Stavis and Marjatta Lyyra
Wylie M. Stecklow
David Stern
Stevenson-Cannon Family Fund
Ian E. Stockdale
Roger A. Stoll
The Stonbely Family Foundation
Elizabeth and Byron Stookey
Leana Stormont
Bert Stover and Teresa Holder
David Suisman
Myles Sussman
Brian Swanson
Brian Thompson
Joseph and Cornelia C. Tierney
Rachel Tiven
Michael Touger and
Margaret Levitt
Randall H. Trigg and
Caitlin Stanton
David B. Turner
The U.S. Charitable Gift Trust
Charles W. and Letitia Ufford
Lisa M. Vidigal and
Antony P. Falco
Mark D. Wainger and
Rhoda Han Pu Woo
Bela August and
Jennifer Flynn Walker
Ian Wallach and
Cindy Chupack
Jennifer Warburg
Rob and Jennifer Warden
Vincent Warren and
Ann Marie Scalia
David Weinraub
Jeffrey Weinrich
†
deceased
54
Daniel Weiss and
Anne Stewart
Peter and Cora Weiss
Lawrence Weschler
Jeffrey and Lucinda Wilner
Miranda Worthen and
Brian Shillinglaw
Ann Wright
Wye Financial & Trust
Robert J. and Karen R. Zelnick
$250-$499
Anonymous
Aaron Abend
William H. Abrashkin
Emory W. and Marilyn M. Ackley
Ethel G. Ackley
Laila Al-Arian
Annamaria Amenta
Susan D. Amussen
Andrew M. Ansorge and
Laura S. Koopman
Barbra Apfelbaum
Noha Arafa
Kevin J. Armstrong
Sharon S. Armstrong
Nicholas Atwood
Bella D. August and
Everett Belvin Williams
Kent Autrey
George S. and Jill S. Avrunin
The Baltimore Family Fund
David Baltimore
Michael Bass and Carole Brown
Paul W. Beach, Jr.
Will Beatty
Mekayla Beaver and
Gregory K. Brown
Michael Beer
Edith and Alice Bell
Nancy Bernstein
Chandra Bhatnagar and
Sunita Patel
Bani Bhattacharya
Peggy Billings
Stephanie G. and
Jacob G. Birnberg
Evelyn Blackman
Carolyn Patty Blum and
Harry W. Chotiner
BNY Mellon Community
Partnership Employee Funds
Renee L. Bowser
Barton and Barbara Boyer
Bill Bragin
Kevi P. Brannelly
Carole R. Brown
Bernice R. Bulgatz
Antonio W. Burr and
Diane di Mauro
Bennett Capers
Alex Carlin
Gordon A. Chapman
Michael Alan Chinn
Renee D. Chotiner and
Stuart W. Gardner
Antonie K. Churg and
Enrique De Los Santos
Clascola Trust
Fritz Cohen
David M. Colbert
Harvey and Maxine Colchamiro
Jim and Cecilia A. Conroy
Farok J. Contractor
Julia and Craig Currie
Anya Elizabeth Darrow and
Louise Ann Harrison
Chandler Davis and
Natalie Zemon Davis
Colin Dayan
Dale S. and Peter M. Demy
Richard A. Denison
Michelle DePass
Jonathan and Kate Dixon
Stephen N. and Phyllis B. Dorsi
George and Minna Doskow
Lewis and Edith S. Drabkin
Michael Drohan and
Joyce Rothermel
David B. Dunning
Leslie Ebert
IN MEMORY OF
Friends, family and loved ones made gifts to CCR in memory of the people listed below. By designating CCR for support (often instead
of flowers), donors both promote their own social justice values and recognize that the individual being honored shared these values
and would want the work to continue after them.
13+ Killed by Drone in Yemen
Milton Abelson
Olivia I. Abelson
Tora Bikson
Rose and Morris Blau
Gladys and Tippy Blum
Robert and Frances Boehm
Marguerite D. Bomse
Miranda Campbell
Marilyn B. Clement
Nicholas Cominos
Rhonda Copelon
Jessica Davidson
James A. Dombrowski
Tod Ensign
Herbert S. Feinberg
Lotte E. Feinberg
Philip Field
Gregory H. Finger
Edward A. Fox
Walter Goodwin
Linda Green
Ellen B. Hardy
Jane Holtz Kay
Victor Honig
Dorothea Jameson Hurvich
and Leo M. Hurvich
Peter Kapeluck
Arthur Kinoy
Alfred Knobler
Selma Knobler
Ulrich E. Kruse
William Kunstler
Saul Landau
Abby Malmgreen
Iris Mansour
Philip Murray
Syed Nabi
Michael Nussbaum
Jesse W. Page
Bill Parson
Mahlon Fay Perkins
Robert Carl Riddle
Richard Roast
Milton and Margot Rosenblitt
Edith Rosenthal
Douglas Jay Sorensen
Morty Stavis
George R. Tiller
Joseph J. Troy
William and Selma Tucker
Mark Tuminaro
Nancy Winkler
Anne and Jack Wysoker
CCR Donors
55
Katherine Acey
Cathy Albisa
Lauren J. Amsterdam
Oscar Arnold-Nessel
Julian Assange
Radhika Balakrishnan
Robert and Mary Berlind
Jane Bowman
L. Brinkin
Ann M. Cammett and
Marcia Gallo
Michael Chechanover
Atessa Chehrazi and Karl Krooth
Gianpaolo Ciocco
Laney Cohen
Bethann Corr and Family
Nancy Costello and
Katherine Rodway
Theodore Ade Crooks
Annette Warren Dickerson
Susan Dunham
David P. Elkinton and Janis Hurst
Niki and Matt Ellis
Traci L. Ext
Ann Fawcett Ambia
The Fennell Family
Sheri Fink
Marilyn Forbes
Katherine Franke
Jeff Furman
Thomas A. Gaines
Katherine M. Gallagher
Roy Giordano
Kris Glen
Mark Goldstone
Grace Goodman
Jerry Griffin
Guantánamo Bay Project
John P. Guros
Linda Hamalian and Paul Avrin
Emily B. Harting
Louise Hauser
Joyce Hawes
Dinah Hayse and
Manuel Kraemer
Sally Israel
Jaima Jackson
Paul Jorjorian
David Judd and
Stephanie Schwartz
Richard P. Keavney
Paul Kennedy
John Kim
Maria Couri LaHood
Lisa Levy and Carrie Davis
Britta Lindgren’s Daughter
Chelsea Manning
Patricia Mansor
Erik Means
Kaia Means
Rachel Meeropol
Meg and Zac
David Miao and Jeannie Rusten
Charles and Chantel Modiano
Ken Moore
Frances Mott
William J. Murphy
Ralph Nader
Philip Tajitsu Nash
Marilyn Kleinberg Neimark
Merry E. Neisner
Adamantia Pollis
William P. Quigley
Michael D. Ratner
Julia B. Rauch
Joan and William Rentz
Alex J. Rosenberg
Daniel J. Russo
Ari Rutkin-Becker and
Harris Goldman
Chris and Amy Schaefer
Dan Schember
Jeffrey Schwartz
Andrew E. and Veeta Sledd
Barbara Ellen Smith
Michael Steven Smith
Alisa Solomon
Aaron Stark and Cecilia Chu
Nancy Stearns
Linda Stein
Lynne Stewart
Bonnie Tamres-Moore
Sarah Tsalbins
John Waide
Vincent Warren
Peter Weiss
Ellen Yaroshefsky
Mike and Mary Lu Yavenditti
Michael J. and Naomi Zigmond
Susan Zucker Leff
IN HONOR OF
Those listed below had donations made to CCR in their honor by thoughtful friends, family members or organizations that wanted to
make a meaningful gift with lasting impact. Many of these donations were in lieu of birthday, wedding or holiday gifts, or in commemo-
ration of a special occasion. We thank both the donor and the recipient for sharing their support and for introducing new people to
CCR’s work.
Camille Ehrenberg
Michael Ehrlich
Colin Eisler
Jodie Evans
Saralee E. Evans
Traci L. Ext
Moneim and Lieselotte Fadali
Jeffrey A. Fagan and
Connie S. Fishman
Nancy Fleischer
Anne E. Flynn
Franklin Templeton
Charitable Giving Fund
Elliot Fratkin and
Martha A. Nathan
Maria C. Freeman and
Donald K. Larkin
Terry Freund
Ann Fridlind
Paul Friedlander
David F. Funkhouser
Racheli Gai
Elizabeth Gaines and
John D. Mason
William H. Gavelis
Mary Geddes
Edward I. Geffner
Martin Gellert
Margo R. George and
Catherine Karrass
Frances Geteles-Shapiro
William J. Gilson and
Georgia Wever
Leah Gitter
Mary G. Gleysteen
Richard A. and Carolyn Glickstein
Brian Goble
Jean R. Goldman
Deborah Goldsmith
Carla M. Goldstein and
Nathaniel K. Charny
Toby Golick
Richard A. Gollub and
Rita A. Clark-Gollub
56
RECURRING
The following donors have made recurring gifts to CCR. Often made monthly, these gifts provide a convenient way to donate, as well as
a reliable stream of support for the Center. Recurring gifts make it possible to sustain our ongoing cases and advocacy. Thank you!
Anonymous
Cathy Albisa and Waldo Cubero
Margaret and Allen Alexander
Theresa F. Alt
Tom Angotti
Barbra Apfelbaum
Noha Arafa
M.L. Armstrong
T. Witt Athey, III
Everett B. Williams and
Bella D. August
Kent Autrey
Elaine Babian
Susanne Bader
Radhika Balakrishnan and
David W. Gillcrist
Jerome and Ruth Balter
Lester Baltimore
Ajamu Baraka
Harriet Barlow
William Barnickle
Jeremy Barth
Barbara and Philip Bayless
Paul W. Beach, Jr.
Will Beatty
Sara E. Beinert
Christina Benacci
Ruth G. and Carl S. Benson
Ara and Linda Bernardi
Sheila A. Bloom
Herman T. Blumenthal and
Margaret G. Phillips
Fraser Bonnell
Kevi P. Brannelly
Eileen Brenner
Judith and Don Broder
Harold Broker
Betty Brown
James C. Bryan
Rachel Burd
James Byrnes
Matthew Calabaza
Terry Carlson
Randi Cawley
Darlene Ceremello and
Jessea Grennman
Ralph C. and Sara P. Chernoff
Zane Clausen
Joanne M. Collier
Christopher Colvin
Jim and Cecilia A. Conroy
Susan Crile
Manuel Criollo
Susan R. Curtiss and
John M. Gresham
Kenneth Deed
Roger R. Dittmann
Diana Duarte
Kristen Dunn
Richard Eastman
Margaret L. Eberbach
Brandon Eddy
Ray H. and Marilyn Elling
Michael Elmendorf
Susan Epstein
John Everhart
Jean S. Fallow
Ann Fawcett Ambia
Elliot Fratkin and
Martha A. Nathan
Betty Fridena
Paul Friedlander
David F. Funkhouser
Bix Gabriel
Racheli Gai
Dean Gallea
Ronald E. and Jacqueline Garrett
Jason Gibson
William J. Gilson and
Georgia Wever
Jude Glaubman
Joan and Bert Golding
Elizabeth Golubitsky
Jack Gordon
Waleed K. and Hannah Gosaynie
David L. Greenwood
David Gregozek
Gregory Griffin
Margaret and David Gullette
Gitanjali Gutierrez and
Fabian Minors
Robert Haberman
Robert Hahn
Albert and Virginia Hale
David Halperin
Jay Hannah
Jesse Harold
Guy M. Harris
Beth Harris
Emily B. Harting
Emily Hauptmann
Jenny Heinz
Brian K. Henley
David G. Herrmann
Amy Hoch
Ingrid Hogle
Timothy A. Holmes
Eric Hopley, Jr.
Julie Hungar
Kevin M. Hunt and
Margaret Downing
Chris A. Ives and Mishy Lesser
Rachel Kahn-Hut
Martin and Carolyn Karcher
Julie Kay
Virginia Kay
Arthur Kennedy
John and Phyllis Kirkwood
Steve P. LaBash
Caroline Lagenfelt
Nsombi Lambright
Timothy J. Lee and
Eleanor McBride
Phyllis B. and John Lehman
Tim Lennon
Marilyn Levin
Eleonore K. Levine
Mark Levitan
Bruce Luecke
Nancy Lukens
David C. and Penelope Mace
Gerald E. Markowitz
William G. Mascioli
Jason Mayerfeld
Paul Meyer-Strom
Zack Michaelson
Bruce K. and Jane O. Miller
James Mills and
Louise H. Robinson Mills
Jaime Moody
Frank Morrow
Denis D. Mosgofian and
Lori Liederman
Mary and Michael Murphy
Jason A. Neidleman
Frederick Nicholson
Rael Nidess
Hans Noll
CCR Donors
57
Claire Gottfried
Bernard and Jane Gottschalk
Harvey Green
Elizabeth P. Greenberg
Frank and Judith Greenberg
Allan Greenleaf and
Alexandra J. Terziev
Ronald J. Grele
Philip I. Greenblat and
Gloria Greenblat
Kathy J. Gruber and Fred J. Levy
Catherine Gund
Alice L. Hageman and
Aubrey N. Brown
Robert Hahn
John L. Hammond
David Harbater
Jed Hartman
Marguerite H. V. Hasbrouck
Keith Hefner and Diana Autin
Eric Hegblom
James Heintz
Janet Helson and Betty Lundquist
Betty and Jackson Herring
David G. Herrmann
Paul Hertz and James Rauchman
Joyce M. Horman
Gurdon L. Hornor
Richard R. and Elizabeth C. Howe
HP Company Foundation
Alice S. Huang
Stanley Trezevant Hutter
Stella Jacobs
Omar Jadwat and Molly Doherty
The Jewish Community Foundation
The Cecile Goldberg Levine
Philanthropic Fund of the Jewish
Community Foundation of the
Jewish Federation of Greater
Pittsburgh
Jewish Foundation of Greensboro
Aaron Johnson
Ben and Kathleen Jone
Carolyn Jordan and Harry R. Fair
Michael and Louise Kato
Cindi Katz
Joe Kear
Robert Kehr
Gregory Kelly
Billy Kessler
Jacqueline M. Kienzle
Julia Koehler
Ellen D. and Marshall M. Kolba
Rochelle Korman and
Richard Fredman
Jane Kristof
Rachel and Joseph Kruskal
Robert P. Kunreuther
Karin Kunstler Goldman and
Neal Goldman
Daniel Kunstler
Steve LaBash
Louise Lamphere
Eleanor Lange
Wendy LaRiviere
Susan Lee
Martin S. and Gita M. Lefstein
Gerald and Catherine Leibowitz
Shari Leinwand
Tim Lennon
Leo J. and Celia Carlin Fund
Art Leonard
Marilyn Levin
Claire and Lawrence Levine
Mark Levitan
Ida J. Lewenstein
George F. Loewenstein and
Donna Harsch
Matthew London
Marsha L. Love and
Maarten Bosland
Amy Lowenstein
Mary Waterman Lunt
Russell Lyons
Arthur MacEwan and
Margery W. Davies
$250-$499 (continued)
Marina Oshana and David Copp
John Paar
Hertha Poje-Ammoumi
Louise B. Popkin
Warren Popp
Rachel Porter
Almerindo Portfolio
Seemin Qayum
Richard M. Rabin and
Bernice Rabin
Camilo Ramirez
Roger Rankin
Julia B. Rauch
Kay G. Reeves
Denise Rickles
Andrew Rock
Leonard Rodberg
Paula Rogovin
Andrea Rosanoff and
Steve Sparks
Marguerite Rosenthal
Patricia Rosnel
Mary M. and William H. Russell
Gladys and Dick Rustay
Jack Sawyer
Patricia R. Sax and Kay Taylor
Paul Sayvetz
Kathleen Scarborough
Adam Schneider
Manuel and
Bonnie Schonhorn
Ernest A. Schulte
Bennett M. Schwartz
William Seff
Alan Seiden
Daniel Shapiro
Susan L. Sheinfeld
Joy Shigaki
Rafael Shimunov
Joel A. and Ethel H. Shufro
Stephen Shuttleworth
Roberta Singer
Linda K. Sleffel
Maureen Smith
Nathaniel Smith
Richard A. Soble
Vera U. Spohr
David J. Steichen, Jr.
Amanda J. Stent
Melvyn T. Stevens
Leana Stormont
Bert Stover and Teresa Holder
Susan Raikes Sugar
Bill Summers
Mary L. Sutphin
Bo Svensson
Alice C. Swift
Carlyn Syvanen and
Stephen F. Vause
Michael C. Thielmann
Brian Thompson
Douglas Thompson
Sue Lee K. Troutman
Victor and Barbara Ulmer
Israel Vaughn
Felice M. Vega
Lise Vogel
Susan von Arx
Randall Wayne
Robin Webster
Stan and Susan Weingast
Jeffrey D. Weinrich
Deborah Weissman
Kevin Whelan
Lawrence B. Williams
Emerald Young
Mona Younis
Leonard and Ellen Zablow
Richard and Lucy Zaslow
Margaret Zierdt
Loy Zimmerman
58
William H. and Judith W. Matchett
Elaine Matthews
Marc Mauer and
Barbara Francisco
Peter J. Mayer
Lynne Mayocole
Mary Gayle McCall
Gary E. McDole
Jennifer E. Meeropol
Martin and Margaret Melkonian
Bill Metzger
Paul Meyer-Strom
Zack Michaelson
Cora Miles
Marvin and Marline Miller
Donna L. and Sean C. Moffat
Mahmoud D. and Laila Mohamed
Jaime Moody
Helen R. Moore
Todd Moore
Jose Luis Morin and
Jeanette Guillen-Morin
J. Malcolm and Mary Morris
Stephen Morris
Lawrence B. and Claire K. Morse
Richard H. Morse
James Moschella
Denis D. Mosgofian and
Lori Liederman
Holly L. Mosher
Peter D. and Gail S. Mott
Ellen L. and George Mozurkewich
Kathryn L. Mulvey
Mary and Michael Murphy
Peter F. Naccarato
The Nash Foundation
Ronald Neschis
Robert C. Newman
Rael Nidess
Ralph Nielsen
NYCharities.Org
Kristin Ockershauser Dunn
Craig Oettinger
David R. Oran and Silvia M. Arrom
Nancy Oswald
Edward H. Page
Cynthia L. Pansing and
Arlin S. Wasserman
Timothy Patterson
Nora C. and Arnold M. Peace
Elizabeth Perkins
Suzanne D. and Robert J. Petrucci
Pfizer Foundation Matching
Gifts Program
Katrina C. Pflaumer
Hertha Poje-Ammoumi
James Porter, Jr.
Florence B. Prescott
Bruce and Dianne Pringle
Christopher H. and Cynthia F. Pyle
Seemin Qayum
Chloe Quail
Qualcomm Matching
Grant Program
Judy Rabinovitz
Alan and Andrea Rabinowitz
Joni Rabinowitz and John Haer
Jim Radford
Deborah Rand
Mark Rapparport
Amelie L. Ratliff
Syed Razi
Kenneth C. Regal and
Judith A. Ruszkowski
James Reif
Judy F. Richardson
William L. Rittenberg
Lisa Robinson
Andrea Rosanoff and Steve Sparks
Jeffrey Rosenberg and
Sally Stanley
Paul C. Rosenblatt
Marguerite Rosenthal
Patricia Rosnel
Russell Roybal
Steve and Elizabeth Rummage
Jane P. Rundell
Kris Rust
Sigrid A. Salo
Gail A. and M. H. Sangree
Patricia R. Sax
Robert Schaibly and
Steven Storla
James A. Schamus and
Nancy Kricorian
Vivian Schatz
Ellen Schrecker and
Marvin Gettelman
Henry Schreiber
Matthew Scot Schultz and
Catherine E. O’Connell
Lloyd F. and Ann B. Scott
Richard and Betty Seid
Alan Seiden
Grace and Solomon Sevy
Rupa Shah
Sallie Shawl
Nancy Shealy
Joy Shigaki
Ann and Ahmad Shirazi
Stephen Shuttleworth
Carol Smith and
Joseph Esposito
Marjorie M. Smith
Ted Smoot
Rebecca Solnit
Carolyn Sonfield
Douglas K. Spaulding
Victoria A. Steinitz and
Elliot G. Mishler
Cal Stone
Susan M. Strasser
Nancy and Bill Strong
Susan Raikes Sugar
Charles J. Sugnet
Harsh P. Sule and Katharine Larsen
Thomas P. Sullivan
Anand Swaminathan and
Bethany Turke
Daniel B. Szyld
Igor Tandetnik
Kelly F. and Benjamin Taylor
C. Gomer Thomas and
E. Jane Cameron
William Thomas
Bonnie E. Thomson and
Eugene Tillman
tripadvisor Gift Matching Program
Dominick and Mardi Tuminaro
Shamya M. Ullah
Victor K. and Barbara Ulmer
Marc Van Der Hout and
Jodie Le Witter
Benedict Viglietta
Steven Vogel and Jane Henderson
Katherine Waldbauer and
Ronald L. Henry
Todd Walker
Samuel Wallace
Joan M. Warburg
Larry Wartel
Stan and Susan Weingast
Carol Weinstock
Deborah Weissman
Carol Wells and Theodore T. Hajjar
Henry Werner and Holly Thau
Richard P. and Tobey M. Wiebe
Lawrence B. Williams
Allison Wilson and
Jonathan Latham
Ellen J. Winner and
David A. Lewis
Tom Wirtshafter
Daniela Wittmann and
Jonathan Cohn
Thomas and Carol Wolf
Andrea Wolper
Leighton Woodhouse
Fred Woods
Michael Woods
Robert R. and Blaikie F. Worth
Gregg Wright
Alec Wysoker
Judith Yanowitz and
Harry S. Hochheiser
Mona Younis
Noah Zatz
Jeanette Zelhof
Loy Zimmerman
Thomas Zimoski
CCR Donors
59
Program Services $5,461,392
Supporting Services $1,773,836
Total Expenses $7,235,228
Net Assets as of June 30, 2013 $6,324,820
Change in Net Assets $(361,821)
Net Assets as of June 30, 2014 $5,962,999
EXPENSES NET ASSETS
Financial Report July 1 2013–June 30 2014 *Audited pending board approval
n Grants and Contributions $5,825,150
n Court Awards and Attorney Fees $649,062
n Investment Income $329,533
Other Income/loss $(3,786)
* Other Income = Miscellaneous, Publications Income,
and Speaker Fees
n Program Services (Litigation and Advocacy)
Litigation $3,791,622
Education & Outreach $1,669,770
n Supporting Services (Administration and Fundraising)
Administration & General $713,539
Fundraising $1,060,297
Total Revenue, Gains
and Other Support
$6,799,959
Total Expenses
$7,235,228
60
Board of Directors
Katherine Acey
Laila Al-Arian
Catherine Albisa, Chair
Harry Anduze Montaño
Radhika Balakrishnan, Treasurer
Ajamu Baraka
Chandra Bhatnagar, Vice Chair
Katherine Franke
Sherry Frumkin
Abdeen Jabara
Wilhelm H. Joseph, Jr.
Julie F. Kay, Secretary
Nsombi Lambright
Paula Litt
Jules Lobel, President
Michael Ratner, President Emeritus
Alex Rosenberg, Vice-President
Michael Steven Smith
Richard A. Soble
Peter Weiss, Vice-President
Ellen Yaroshefsky
Management Team
Vincent Warren, Executive Director
Baher Azmy, Legal Director
Dorothee Benz, Communications Director
Kevi Brannelly, Development Director
Carolyn Chambers, Associate Executive Director
Annette Warren Dickerson, Director of Education & Outreach
(through November 1, 2013)
Administrative Staff
Amnah Almukhtar, IT and Administrative Assistant
Gregory Butterfield, Administrative Manager
Orlando Gudino, IT Manager
Lisa Levy, Human Resource Systems and Special Projects Manager
Chase Quinn, Executive Assistant
Jeffrey Weinrich, Finance Director
Alberto White, Office Manager
Communications
Lauren Gazzola, Communications Associate for Publications
Jesse Harold, Web Communications and Multimedia Manager
Jen Nessel, Communications Coordinator
Camilo Ramirez, Communications Associate for Social Media
Development
Sara Beinert, Associate Director of Development, Individual Giving
Pam Bradshaw, Grant Writer
Kevin Gay, Database and Online Giving Manager
Emily Harting, Associate Director of Development, Foundations
Christine Kim, Annual Fund Manager
José Monzon, Development Associate
Jeremy Rye, Senior Major Gifts Officer
Education & Outreach
Leili Kashani, Advocacy Program Manager, Guantánamo Global
Justice Initiative (through February 28, 2014)
Laura Raymond, Advocacy Program Manager, International
Human Rights
Meejin Richart, Education and Outreach Administrative Associate
Nahal Zamani, Advocacy Program Manager, Government Misconduct
and Racial Justice
CCR Board and Staff
61
Legal Department
Alexis Agathocleous, Senior Staff Attorney
Darius Charney, Senior Staff Attorney
Claire Dailey, Legal Worker
J. Wells Dixon, Senior Staff Attorney
Abigail Downs, Legal Worker
Omar Farah, Staff Attorney
Katherine Gallagher, Senior Staff Attorney
Ian Head, Legal Worker
Susan Hu, Bertha Fellow
Aliya Hana Hussain, Legal Worker
Shayana Kadidal, Senior Managing Attorney
Pardiss Kebriaei, Senior Staff Attorney
Maria LaHood, Senior Staff Attorney
Jessica Lee, Bertha Fellow
Rachel Meeropol, Senior Staff Attorney
Sunita Patel, Staff Attorney
Ibraham Qatabi, Legal Worker
Ghita Schwarz, Senior Staff Attorney
Purvi Shah, Bertha Justice Institute Director
Pamela Spees, Senior Staff Attorney
Leah Todd, Assistant to Legal Director
An-Tuan Williams, Bertha Justice Institute
Program Associate
Chauniqua Young, Bertha Fellow
Consultants
Riptide Communications, Communications and Media
Nicholas Coster, Graphic Design
Sophie Weller, Guantánamo Resettlement Liaison
Jennifer Oscroft, Guantánamo Resettlement Liaison
Mihal R. Ansik
Adriana Ballines
Kristine Beckerle
Tianna Bethune
Lilian Boctor
Neijla Calvo
Matthew Daloisio
Diana Damschroder
Rachel Davidson
Pawanpreet K. Dhaliwal
Zamira Djabarova
Claunick Duronville
Eric Eingold
Katherine Erickson
Farbod Faraji
Andres J. Gallegos
Sophie Gebreselassie
Dawit Getachew
Scheagbe M. Grigsby
Antonia House
Bianca Isaias
Brenda Kombo
Aparna Krishnaswamy
Whitney G. Leeds
Michael Mangels
Alexandria E. McKee
Sophia Mire
Hoda Mitwally
Zachery Morris
Jasmina Nogo
Nanjala Nyabola
Leena Odeh
Nikkita R. Oliver
Nikita Parekh
Sarah Raab
Bruce Reilly
Caitlin Russell
Robert D. Sanderman
Melissa Stewart
Nicole A. Summers
Leana S. Taing
Mariah Thompson
Jesus Torres Garza
Megan Wachspress
Kyle Webster
Leah Weston
Tyler Whittenberg
2013-14 Ella Bakers
Interns
Arwa Alhoribi
Amanda Bass
Isabel Benincasa-Reade
Clark Binkley
Jessica Brand
Christian Castaing
Scott Foletta
Max Geller
Emerson
Gordon-Marvin
Rue Hogarth
Simratpal Kaur
Tanya Keilani
Erica Maldonado
Meagan McKinstry
Tamara Morgenthau
Meave Murphy
Christina Murphy
Claerwen O’Hara
Kevin Park
Tessa Ruben
Desiree Salomone
Rachel Silverman
Mica Sloan
Kayla M. Smith
Pamela Stamoulis
Jenna Tabatznik
Kevin Tang
Ellen Weinstein
Volunteers
Barbara Aubrey
Megan Bean
Robert Bloom
Sara Corda
Rosemary F. Faulkner
Mary J. Geissman
Natalie Kabasakalian
Ruth Kreinik
Grainne Mellon
Kate Morris
Merry E. Neisner
Naomi Sager
Douglas B. Sapola
Sally Saulvester
Manuel Schonhorn
Jeena Shah
Dan Shain
Peter Shepherd
Margaret Tobin
John H. Wilson
62
In Memoriam
Ruby Dee
Legendary actress and civil rights activist Ruby Dee passed away peace-
fully at the age of 91. She lent her voice and presence to the cause of
racial equality inside and outside of show business. She was an active
member of the Congress of Racial Equality, the Student Nonviolent Coor-
dinating Committee, the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and
the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. In 1946
she joined the cast of “Jeb,” where she met her future husband Ossie
Davis. Over their nearly 60 years together, they supported various causes
including CCR. The day of Dr. King’s historic March on Washington, they
were the masters of ceremonies for the entertainment event where Dee
delivered a stirring reading. Over the course of her acting career, which
spanned from the 1940s to the 21st century, she earned an Emmy, a Grammy and a Screen Actors
Guild Award, along with a 2008 Oscar nomination.
Tod Ensign
A leading lawyer and activist for U.S. veteran’s rights, Tod Ensign made
a huge impact on the lives of GIs, veterans and those opposed to war.
In 1969, Tod co-founded Citizen Soldier and participated in a range of
cases, including the Agent Orange class action and the Vietnam-era
Winter Soldier Investigation. Tod worked to provide health care and
compensation to thousands of veterans and helped organize the legal
defense of Iraq war resisters. He also challenged the military’s policy of
discrimination against LGBT servicemembers. Tod’s personal passions
included wine, food, travel and jazz. His partner Francine Smilen and
their daughter Rachel Ensign chose CCR as the recipient of gifts in his
memory to ensure that his work for justice continues. Tod also served as
co-counsel to CCR.
Richard Mehl
Richard C. Mehl had two passions during his life: social justice and
lifelong learning. By high school, he had become a socialist who valued
individual freedom. He opposed violence and was a conscientious
objector during the Vietnam War. He met his wife, Paula Allred, at
Kalamazoo Friends (Quaker) Meeting in 1971, and the two began a life
together filled with a love of nature, music, and entrepreneurship. In
Richard’s later years, he worked in the library at Western Michigan Uni-
versity, which gave him ready access to the books that he so voraciously
devoured. CCR is grateful that he remembered the Center in his will
with a generous bequest.
Bert Aubrey
Peg Brennan
Peter Broner
Maxine Burress
Wallace B. Cleland
Norman Eisner
Roma B. Foldy
Winifred W. Hirsch
Helen S. Lane
Rosemarie D. Lehman
Irwin Luckman
Jean A. Mann
Philip Murray
H. Milton Peek
Jennie Rhine
Margot Rosenblitt
Sylvia Schreibman
Peter and Toshi Seeger
Kenneth E. Tilsen
Murray Tobak
Nancy Winkler
Tanja Winter
The following CCR supporters
passed away this year and
many thoughtfully honored
CCR with a bequest. It is
always sad to lose a member
of our community, but their
ideals will live on in the work
they supported at CCR.
Give to CCR and
Your Gift Will Have
Twice the Impact!
Thanks to our friends at The Atlantic Philan-
thropies, CCR has an exciting opportunity
to raise an additional half million dollars this
year. From July 1, 2014 through June 30, 2015,
Atlantic will match, dollar for dollar, up to
$500,000 from:
• First time donors to CCR. Any gift you
make will be matched 100%;
• Donors who increase their giving to
CCR. For example, if you gave $100 last year
and increase your giving to $150 during the
matching period, $50 will count toward the
match;
• Lapsed Donors. Haven’t been able to give
to CCR in over two years? Now is the time to
renew your support! Give today and 100% of
your gift will count toward the match.
We are incredibly grateful to The Atlantic Phi-
lanthropies for this tremendous opportunity to
fuel the fight for justice, and hope that you will
join with CCR to help us reach our goal. Thank
you for your goodwill, generosity, and for part-
nering with CCR to make a more just world.
To donate online, go to
CCRjustice.org/
donatetoday
Ways You Can Support CCR!
USE SOCIAL MEDIA and share the news. Follow @theCCR on Twitter and
retweet us. Like “Center for Constitutional Rights” on Facebook and share our
posts. Subscribe to our email list at: www.CCRjustice.org and forward our newslet-
ters and action alerts to your friends.
MAKE AN ONLINE GIFT at: www.CCRjustice.org/donatetoday. It’s
fast, easy, and secure, and your gift will go to work right away. Online gifts are
a greener way to give—and reduce mailing expenses and supplies so more of
your gift goes to programs.
ATTEND A LOCAL EVENT if CCR is in your neighborhood—and bring
a friend! If you are on our email list you will receive invitations, though public
events are also listed on our calendar at: www.CCRjustice.org/calendar.
HOST A HOUSE PARTY to fundraise for CCR and introduce friends and allies
to CCR’s work. Public events are also listed on our calendar at: www.CCRjustice.org/
calendar.
GIVE THE GIFT OF CCR! Ask friends and family to make gifts to CCR in your
honor as your holiday gift OR give to CCR in honor of folks on your list. You will pay
tribute to our shared social justice values, while fueling CCR’s efforts to protect and
extend human rights. Do this online at: www.CCRjustice.org/donatetoday
MAKE YOUR GIFT RECURRING These gifts provide CCR with a reliable,
steady source of support making it possible for us to plan better and take on more cases.
Sign up for a monthly recurring gift on our website: www.CCRjustice.org/donatetoday.
DONATE STOCK If you donate appreciated securities to CCR, you may
avoid capital gains taxes and receive a charitable deduction. Please contact CCR
at 212-614-6489 for stock transfer instructions.
INCLUDE CCR IN YOUR WILL Including CCR in your estate plan is an
excellent way to make a statement about the values you held during your lifetime,
while ensuring CCR stays strong for the future. Just call Sara Beinert at 212-614-6448
for suggested language.
