In the wake of 9/11, the USDoJ began use of material witness warrants to detain persons with ties to terrorists.  One of them, Abdullah Al-Kidd, sued former Attorney General John Ashcroft personally.  The Supreme Court took up that case today in Ashcroft v. Al-Kidd, No. 10-98, limited to Questions 1 and 2 in the certiorari petition. They are:

1. Whether the court of appeals erred in denying petitioner absolute immunity from the pretext claim.

2. Whether the court of appeals erred in denying petitioner qualified immunity from the pretext claim based on the conclusions that (a) the Fourth Amendment prohibits an officer from executing a valid material witness warrant with the subjective intent of conducting further investigation or preventively detaining the subject; and (b) this Fourth Amendment rule was clearly established at the time of respondent's arrest.

Question 3, not taken up, was:

3. Whether the former Attorney General may be held liable for the alleged false statements in the affidavit supporting the material witness warrant, even though the complaint does not allege that he either participated in the preparation of the affidavit or implemented any policy encouraging such alleged misconduct.